Temporary workers will no longer be able to bargain for job benefits as part of a unit with permanent employees, the National Labor Relations Board has ruled, reversing a Clinton-era precedent.
In a 3 to 2 vote that was issued Friday, the three members appointed by President Bush -- Robert J. Battista, the chairman; Peter C. Schaumber and Ronald E. Meisburg -- said there is a difference between temporary and permanent workers. "Thus, the entity that the two groups of employees look to as their employer is not the same. No amount of legal legerdemain can alter that fact," their ruling stated.
It overturned a 2000 NLRB ruling, called M.B. Sturgis, that said bargaining units that combined both temporary and permanent employees were permissible.
Two NLRB members appointed by Clinton, Wilma B. Liebman and Dennis P. Walsh, dissented. They cited the rise of temp workers and argued that those workers would essentially be barred from organizing labor unions unless their employers consented. They said the board has a "disturbing reluctance to recognize changes in the economy and the workplace."
The new case is the latest of three major decisions overturned by the board this year by 3 to 2 votes. In June, the board ruled that employees in nonunion companies are no longer entitled to have a co-worker present when they are interviewed as part of a disciplinary investigation. In July, it ruled that graduate teaching assistants at universities are not employees, and therefore cannot organize.
Worker advocates say the temporary worker ruling could have a major effect in an economy that is relying more and more on the hiring of workers who usually aren't eligible for health care and other benefits.
"It's a very big deal," said Kate L. Bronfenbrenner, director of labor education research at Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y. "Sturgis said you can't put a temp label on someone to avoid unionizing. It took away the use of the temp status, but also meant you didn't have second-class citizens. Now, by overturning Sturgis, they are giving employers another incentive to disenfranchise workers."
Lawyers representing companies said the ruling will help employers while not really harming workers.
The decision permits temporary workers to organize if both their temporary agency and the company where they work consent. But at least one labor expert said that will be hard to achieve.
"It's going to be an almost impossible set of permissions to be met," said Harley Shaiken, a professor of labor issues at the University of California at Berkeley. "I think it is meant to and will discourage organization among temporary workers."