12/15/2025: Union Election Ordered at Pew Research Center
The long battle between ILWU and IAM for work at the Port of Seattle continues.
The New York Times had a piece about the NLRB on Monday that is worth reading. In today’s roundup, we have two cases, one a Ninth Circuit decision to have the full Ninth Circuit panel rehear a case involving a jurisdictional dispute between ILWU and IAM and another ordering a union election at the Pew Research Center.
The Pew Research Center, 05-RM-376431 (Regional Election Decision)
The National Labor Relations Board’s Regional Director for Region 5 has ordered a representation election at the Pew Research Center following the nonprofit’s filing of an RM petition in response to a union recognition demand. The Nonprofit Professional Employees Union, IFPTE Local 70 sought to represent a unit of the Washington, D.C.-based research organization’s employees on November 21, 2025, prompting the employer to file the petition under Section 9(c)(1)(B) of the National Labor Relations Act.
The December 15, 2025 hearing proceeded without litigation of any issues, as both parties stipulated to the appropriate bargaining unit composition and election logistics. The agreed-upon unit includes all full-time and regular part-time junior-, mid-, and senior-level employees at the employer’s Washington facility, while excluding employees in Finance & Operations, Human Resources, Legal, Executive Office, and Fundraising departments, along with executive assistants, confidential employees, temporary workers, managers, guards, and supervisors.
Regional Director Sean R. Marshall found that the employer meets the Board’s commerce jurisdiction standards based on its annual gross revenues exceeding $250,000 and purchasing goods valued over $5,000 from outside the District of Columbia. The decision confirms no existing collective bargaining agreement covers the petitioned-for unit and no contract bar exists to prevent the election.
The secret-ballot election is scheduled for January 21, 2026, from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. at the employer’s facility. Employees on the payroll during the period ending December 4, 2025 will be eligible to vote, subject to standard eligibility rules regarding strikes, terminations, and military service. The employer must provide a detailed voter list to the Regional Director and all parties by December 18, 2025, containing full names, contact information, and employment details of eligible voters.
The decision emphasizes standard procedural requirements, including mandatory posting of election notices at least three full working days before the election and electronic distribution if the employer customarily uses such communications. Failure to comply with voter list or posting requirements may provide grounds for setting aside the election if proper objections are filed.
International Longshore and Warehouse Union v. National Labor Relations Board, 23-632, (9th Circuit)
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has vacated a three-judge panel decision and ordered en banc rehearing in a consolidated case involving a jurisdictional dispute between the International Longshore and Warehouse Union and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. The case, which also involves the Pacific Maritime Association as a petitioner, centers on an NLRB determination regarding which union has the right to perform certain disputed work.
The matter originated as a Section 10(k) jurisdictional dispute proceeding before the NLRB, where the Board was required to determine the proper work assignment between two competing unions. The consolidated petitions for review involve multiple parties challenging different aspects of the Board’s decision—the unions, the employer association, and the Board itself seeking enforcement.
By ordering en banc review, the full court of nonrecused active judges will reconsider the legal issues that were initially decided by the three-judge panel. This procedural move typically signals that the case involves questions of exceptional importance or that the panel decision may conflict with prior circuit precedent. The vacatur of the panel opinion means that decision no longer has effect, and the case will be reargued before the larger en banc court.
The underlying NLRB case number indicates this is a jurisdictional dispute proceeding, which arises when two or more unions claim the right to perform specific work, and the employer is caught between potentially conflicting work assignments that could lead to strikes or work stoppages under Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the National Labor Relations Act.
The complete decisional history of this saga can be found here.