5 ms·

.

• woodruffw 5y ago
  The presumable use is in having the NLRB officially state that it considers the previous election to be irregular.
  • granzymes 5y ago
    .
    • woodruffw 5y ago
      The media coverage is certainly a benefit! But I don't know if it's the "real" one: the NLRB seemingly agrees that Amazon's manipulation efforts had a real effect on the previous vote. Even if the vote fails again, a change in the percentages is an important outcome.
      • granzymes 5y ago
        .
        • woodruffw 5y ago
          I agree that it isn't an especially big punishment. But I don't think it's intended to be one: the NLRB is charged with issuing a decision regarding the validity of the previous election, not determining the viability of any future election. In other words, if it's a mistake to perform the election again, it's the union's mistake to make. But I, for one, think it's a sound strategy on their part.