NC miners challenge NLRB policy blocking vote to remove union

Employees at a western North Carolina mining operation are asking the National Labor Relations Board to overturn a Biden-era policy they say is preventing them from voting to remove a union they no longer want, a case that could have national implications now that the federal labor board has regained a quorum.

Workers at The Quartz Corp.’s Spruce Pine facility filed a petition in late 2025 seeking a union decertification election to remove United Mine Workers of America representation. According to filings, the petition contained enough employee signatures to trigger an election under federal labor law.

Despite that showing, NLRB Region 10 blocked the vote after United Mine Workers officials filed a series of unfair labor practice charges against the employer. The regional office placed the election “in abeyance” under the NLRB’s current “blocking charge” policy, which allows union officials to delay or stop a decertification election by filing charges alleging employer misconduct, even if those allegations have not yet been proven.

Quartz Corp. employee Blake Davis has now filed a Request for Review with the NLRB in Washington, DC, asking the full board to reverse the regional decision and reconsider the blocking charge policy itself.

“Allowing a self-interested party to unilaterally block elections conflicts with the [National Labor Relations Act], which requires the Board to hold an election” when workers submit a valid decertification petition, Davis’ filing argues. The policy, the brief adds, “offends the entire structure and purpose of the Act: employee free choice.”

The National Labor Relations Act directs the NLRB to administer secret-ballot elections when a “question concerning representation” exists. Davis and his attorneys contend that the blocking charge policy improperly allows unions to prevent that question from ever reaching a vote.

Union officials filed multiple unfair labor practice charges before and after the decertification petition was submitted. None of the allegations has yet been adjudicated, and the filing argues that some are speculative or unrelated to the employees’ desire to remove the union.

NLRB Region 10 issued an order blocking the election without identifying which allegations justified the delay or how they would interfere with employee free choice. “By failing to distinguish between allegations that might warrant blocking and those that plainly would not, the Region reduced the rule to a numbers game,” the Request for Review said.

The dispute mirrors a similar case involving construction materials workers employed by CalPortland in Fresno, California. Those workers also sought to decertify their union and saw their election blocked after union officials filed unfair labor practice charges.

However, union officials in the CA case later withdrew their charges, clearing the way for a decertification vote. As a result, the workers’ appeal to the NLRB in that case is expected to be dismissed as moot.

The North Carolina case has become the primary vehicle for challenging the blocking charge policy.

Both Davis and the California worker who filed the separate appeal, Darrell Dunlap, are receiving legal assistance from attorneys with the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a nonprofit organization that opposes compulsory unionism.

Dunlap’s filing argued that the blocking charge policy also violates the Administrative Procedure Act because it is arbitrary and fails to accomplish its stated purpose.

“The Board claims the policy is needed to prevent ‘coercive elections,’” Dunlap’s brief said, “yet the only mechanism it employs is giving union officials the unilateral power to block elections or allow them to proceed.”

Critics of the policy say it creates incentives for unions to file charges strategically to delay votes they may lose, sometimes for months or years, while litigation continues.

The blocking charge policy was curtailed under the NLRB’s 2020 Election Protection Rule, which generally allowed decertification elections to proceed even when related charges were pending. The Biden administration’s NLRB rescinded that rule in 2022, restoring broader authority for regions to block elections.

The issue is now resurfacing, as the NLRB has regained a quorum following recent Senate confirmations of presidential appointees under President Trump, enabling the five-member Board to issue decisions and reconsider existing policies.

“The NLRB’s ‘blocking charge’ policy serves only to let union officials stop the workers they claim to ‘represent’ from making a free choice about whether a union in their workplace is right for them,” said National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix in a statement.

“Mr. Davis speaks for countless workers across the country who are trapped under union boss dictates because of this rule,” Mix said. “Reversing this policy would be an excellent place to start if the Board is serious about restoring employee choice.”

North Carolina’s right-to-work law adds another dimension to the dispute. While the law protects employees from being forced to join or financially support a union, it does not eliminate a union’s authority as the exclusive bargaining representative once certified.

Davis and his coworkers argue that decertification is the only way to end that control.

“Defunding the union is only part of the struggle,” the filing said. “As long as the union maintains monopoly bargaining power, it exercises control over the work conditions of every employee, regardless of whether they support it.”

The NLRB has not yet ruled on Davis’ Request for Review. A decision could determine not only whether the Spruce Pine workers will receive a vote, but also whether the board revisits a policy that affects decertification efforts nationwide.

“NC miners challenge NLRB policy blocking vote to remove union” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.