NLRB: 8 Weeks is Too Long to Wait on Info Request

Last week the Board hit a Puerto Rico janitorial contractor with an 8(a)(5) violation for the most avoidable mistake in labor law: ignoring a union information request.

Per the decision (OS-DB-JV-2, LLC, 374 NLRB No. 115), SEIU Local 1996 emailed the employer in February 2024 asking for payroll records, work schedules, and holiday/vacation/sick pay data for unit employees. Standard CBA administration stuff.

The employer punted to its lawyers. Then it ghosted. Eight weeks later, it finally responded — not with records, but with citations to CBA articles and a demand that the union “justify” why old data was relevant.

The Board wasn’t impressed.

Two things worth memorizing if you’re on the employer side.

First, payroll, schedules, and benefit accruals are presumptively relevant. You don’t get to make the union explain itself. The Board applies a broad, discovery-type standard — potential relevance is enough.

Second, the existence of a CBA doesn’t wipe out the relevance of pre-CBA data. Baseline information matters when a union is administering a first contract.

And if you can’t produce the data in the format requested, you have to say so. Silence is a violation.

Basically, when a union information request lands in your inbox, the clock starts. Forwarding it to outside counsel and waiting two months is not pemritted. It’s a charge.

If your HR team isn’t sure how to respond to one of these letters — it’s worth a conversation before the Board gets involved.