Congress raises union certification bar to two-thirds supermajority

What it does

This bill amends the National Labor Relations Act to require that unions be designated as exclusive employee representatives only through secret-ballot elections in which at least two-thirds of eligible employees participate. It also raises the threshold for union certification from a simple majority to a two-thirds supermajority of participating voters. The bill takes effect 6 months after enactment and applies to all future union elections.

Why we flagged it

The bill's operative mechanism is to raise the procedural and numerical barriers to union certification. It does not ban unions or secret ballots (both already exist under current law); it makes certification harder by imposing a two-thirds supermajority and participation floor. This is a restriction on workers' ability to organize, not a transparency or procedural reform.

What the text implies

• The two-thirds participation requirement may be impossible to meet in large workforces with high absenteeism or turnover, effectively creating a de facto ban on union certification in some settings.
• The bill does not specify whether the two-thirds threshold applies to the total eligible workforce or only to those who vote; if the former, a union could lose even if it wins 90% of votes cast, if turnout is below 67%.
• The supermajority requirement inverts the democratic principle of majority rule and is higher than thresholds used for constitutional amendments, treaty ratification, or most legislative supermajorities.
• Workers in industries with seasonal, part-time, or high-turnover employment face compounded difficulty meeting the participation floor, potentially excluding entire sectors from collective bargaining.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

The bill raises the threshold for union certification from a simple majority to a two-thirds supermajority and requires two-thirds of all eligible employees to participate, making it substantially harder for workers to organize and gain collective bargaining rights. Workers who might otherwise form a union under current law are now blocked by a supermajority requirement that exceeds the threshold used for most democratic decisions.

Who stands to gain

• employers (reduced union organizing pressure)
• anti-union consulting firms
• industries with high labor costs (manufacturing, hospitality, logistics)

Named in the bill

National Labor Relations Act, Section 9, NLRB (National Labor Relations Board), exclusive representative, secret ballot election

Where it stands

9 cosponsors: 9 Republicans.

• Apr 1, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Apr 1, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Education and Workforce · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

7 lobbying clients named this bill on 12 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $25,228,586 in lobbying spend. A filing names 36 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 86% of bills with at least one filing.

Robert Onder, the sponsor, reported $454,000 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A. — $17,960,000 on 1 filing
• National Retail Federation — $3,881,000 on 2 filings
• AFL-CIO — $1,520,000 on 2 filings
• National Association of Wholesaler-distributors — $880,000 on 2 filings
• International Foodservice Distributors Association — $532,586 on 2 filings

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.