PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 262.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Nov 30, 2011
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on November 10, 2011. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Workforce Democracy and Fairness Act - Amends the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) to revise requirements for determination by the National Labor Relation Board (NLRB) of an appropriate bargaining unit before an election of collective bargaining representation. (In effect reverses the NLRB's August 26, 2011, decision in Specialty Healthcare and Rehabilitation of Mobile and its June 22, 2011, rulemaking regarding proposed changes to procedures involving the election of collective bargaining representation.)
Replaces the current restriction in the meaning of collective bargaining unit to employer unit, craft unit, plant unit, or subdivision. Requires the NLRB, instead, to determine a unit as appropriate for collective bargaining if it consists of employees that share a sufficient community of interest. Specifies factors the NLRB must consider when making such determinations.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits exclusion of employees from the unit unless the group's interest are sufficiently distinct from those of other employees to warrant the establishment of a separate unit.
Requires the NLRB, upon due notice, to provide a hearing at least 14 days after the filing of an election petition for collective bargaining representation to investigate those petitions the NLRB has reasonable cause to believe have a question of representation affecting commerce. Requires such hearings be non-adversarial.
Requires the NLRB to: (1) direct an election by secret ballot as soon as practicable, but in any event not before 35 calendar days following the filing of an election petition, in cases where a question of representation exists; and (2) acquire, at least 7 days after its final determination of the appropriate bargaining unit, a list of all eligible voters (including certain informational data) from the employer and make it available to all parties.
People & committees
Rep. Kline, John [R-MN-2] · R–MN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 262.
Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 235 - 188 (Roll no. 869).
House roll call 869 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 235 - 188 (Roll no. 869).
House roll call 869 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 185 - 239 (Roll no. 868). (consideration: CR H7985)
House roll call 868 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H7985)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Sutton motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to report the same back to the House with an amendment to amend the National Labor Relations Act by adding provisions that ensure a level playing field for employees, fair and equal access to voters prior to an election, and discourages outsourcing of jobs, pending reservation of a point of order. Subsequently, the reservation of a point of order was withdrawn.
Ms. Sutton moved to recommit with instructions to Education and the Workforce. (consideration: CR H7984-7985; text: CR H7984)
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. (text of committee amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H7972-7973)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H7984)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 3094.
On motion to strike the enacting clause Failed by recorded vote: 176 - 241 (Roll no. 863).
House roll call 863 · Individual votesDEBATE - Mrs. Moore was recognized for 5 minutes to move that the Committee rise and report the bill to the House with recommendation that the enacting clause be striken.
Ms. Moore moved to strike the enacting clause.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mrs. Jackson Lee demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 470, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment No. 4.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Walz amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Walz demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 470, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Walz amendment No. 3.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Boswell amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Boswell demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 470, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Boswell amendment No. 2.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Bishop (NY) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Bishop (NY) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 470, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Bishop (NY) amendment No. 1.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 3094.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Ted Poe to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 470 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3094 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. The resolution waives all points of order against consideration of the bill. The resolution provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Workforce now printed in the bill shall be considered as orginial text for the purpose of amendment and shall be considered as read. The resolution waives all points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 470. (consideration: CR H7957-7986)
Rule H. Res. 470 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 470 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3094 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. The resolution waives all points of order against consideration of the bill. The resolution provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Workforce now printed in the bill shall be considered as orginial text for the purpose of amendment and shall be considered as read. The resolution waives all points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 186.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and the Workforce. H. Rept. 112-276.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and the Workforce. H. Rept. 112-276.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended).
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Hearings Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jul 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3094 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3094 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3094 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3094 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.