FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                               
February 5, 2018
CONTACT: Ryan Williams


National Labor Relations Board Rings In New Era

Heather Greenaway
February 5, 2018
The Daily Caller


During the previous administration, it is hard to argue that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) didn’t virtually become an appendage of Big Labor. For eight years, the union bosses who pumped millions of dollars into President Barack Obama’s campaigns were rewarded with nominations leading to decisions that served as political payback. Losing any semblance of independence, the agency that exists in part to protect our nation’s workers, instituted job-killing regulations advancing Big Labor’s priorities.

However, it is a new day at the NLRB. During his first year in office, President Donald Trump has nominated respected legal and workplace experts who are taking the initial and critical steps to return the agency to its intended role of protecting “the rights of private sector employees” and restoring the balance of power in the workplace.

On the heels of Marvin Kaplan and William Emanuel — both well-respected lawyers — being seated on the Board and Peter Robb taking over as general counsel, President Trump has nominated John Ring to serve as a Board member.

Ring’s credentials include working in the law practice of Morgan Lewis as a partner assisting clients on a range of issues, including labor contract negotiations and corporate restructuring. Ring as is a member of the Washington D.C. and Connecticut bars, and a fellow of the College of Labor and Employment Lawyers.

During his time at Morgan Lewis, Ring tried cases in front of the NLRB and represented workers impacted by Obama-era decisions, such as the ambush election ruling. This misguided decision shortened the time frame for union elections to as few as 11 days, allowing union organizers to quietly garner support for unionization, then ambush workers with a vote before they had a chance to receive and review critical information concerning the implications unionization could have on their lives.

In response to these actions, Ring wrote, “the proposed rules represent a significant encroachment into both an employer’s business and an employee’s privacy,” an assessment that was a far cry of the union shills previously in the NLRB. As for the ambush rule, the Workforce Fairness Institute supports the Workforce Democracy and Fairness Act (WFDA), legislation requiring at least 35 days between filing an election petition and holding an election.

For eight years under the former administration, workers faced stagnant wages, job-killing regulations and limited opportunities. Now, with Ring’s nomination to serve under Chairman Kaplan, workers can have a newfound confidence that the agency will once again act as an impartial defendant of their rights and stand up to the Big Labor bosses who encroached on the workplace in recent years.

The new members of the Board represent a real opportunity to roll back the anti-worker rulings of the last administration and restore the balance of power in the workplace, starting with rescinding the ambush election rule.

Heather Greenaway is a spokesperson for the Workforce Fairness Institute.

To access the op-ed, click here.


The Workforce Fairness Institute is an organization committed to educating voters, employers, employees and citizens about issues affecting the workplace.  To learn more, please visit:

To schedule an interview with a Workforce Fairness Institute representative, please contact Ryan Williams at (202) 677-7060.


Featured Blog

AZ Daily Sun--Coconino Voices: PRO Act legislation would hurt local businesses

— 05.13.2021 —
By: Julie Pastrik Arizona businesses and workers have had an incredibly challenging year given the economic slowdown that followed in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. However, local businesses and industries across the state are resilient and on the road to a strong recovery that will mean more jobs for Arizona workers and increased economic development to strengthen our communities. That is, as long as Congress does not move forward with potentially devastating legislation that would hurt local employers and employees alike while impeding our state’s economic recovery. Unfortunately, some members of Congress seem determined to do just that by pushing through the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act. As harmless as the name may sound, the PRO Act would have serious repercussions for local businesses, particularly smaller ones, while undermining long-standing rights for employees and threatening the growing gig economy that has helped provide much-needed income for so many during this time. Arizona is fortunate to have leaders like Senators Mark Kelly and Kyrsten Sinema, who have both refrained from joining the vast majority of their Democratic colleagues in cosponsoring the PRO Act. In a slap in the face to Arizona workers, the PRO Act removes one of the most fundamental rights a worker has when it comes to voting in elections to determine whether to unionize: the secret ballot. Instead, workers could be forced to sign union authorization cards in front of other employees, their employer, or union organizers. This bill would also destroy workers’ right to privacy by allowing unions access to personal information, including their home address and personal phone number. If that doesn’t open the door to union intimidation and harassment, I don’t know what does. As if that was not bad enough, the PRO Act would create major new challenges for Arizona businesses, making it harder for them to create jobs, expand in their communities, and even keep their doors open. It would redefine what it means to be a “joint employer” under national labor law, greatly complicating existing relationships between franchisors and franchisees as well as between business owners, contractors, subcontractors, and vendors and suppliers. At the same time, it would interfere with attorney-client confidentiality and make it much more difficult for small businesses to secure a legal advice on labor issues. Particularly harmful during these times, the PRO Act would apply a failed policy from California to national labor law by using the “ABC” test to determine whether a worker is an independent contractor or employee. This makes it much harder to qualify as an independent contractor, threatening the freedom and flexibility that tens of thousands of Arizonans find in independent contracting and gig economy work. Ultimately, the PRO Act is bad public policy that only works for union leaders to inflate their falling ranks while threatening workers’ rights, undermining small businesses, and jeopardizing a growing part of our economy. This is not a good solution for Arizona, and Senators Sinema and Kelly should stay firm and not cosponsor this misguided legislation.
Read More