Court Opinion

ID: 9475785
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 05:38:07.117573+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:44:55.965503
License: Public Domain

HARRY T. EDWARDS, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
The appellants argue that post-election remedies are inadequate in those situations, as here, where the Secretary of Labor has approved an election procedure in advance by opinion letter or interpretive rule. That argument, however, is untenable. As the government conceded at oral argument, a district court in a Bachowski suit, see Dunlop v. Bachowski, 421 U.S. 560, 95 S.Ct. 1851, 44 L.Ed.2d 377 (1975), would be empowered to remedy infirmities in a union election notwithstanding the fact that the Secretary had approved the election procedures in advance. In other words, pre-election approval would not in and d itself constitute a defense precluding relief that would otherwise be appropriate under Bachowski. It is with this understanding that I concur in the judgment of the court.