NLRB Region 12 Reinforces Imminent Closure Standard in SolarMovil PR LLC Decision

Why It Matters

The guidance gives project‑based employers a clear defense against union petitions, reducing litigation risk and labor costs, while confirming that temporary staffing does not exempt firms from NLRA duties.

Key Takeaways

• Document project end dates and timelines to prove imminent closure
• NLRB dismisses petitions when operations end within 90 days
• Temporary workers remain subject to NLRA obligations and hearings
• Clear employee communication strengthens employer position in disputes
• Maintain contracts, reports, and layoff notices as evidence

Pulse Analysis

The National Labor Relations Board has long balanced workers’ rights to organize with employers’ operational realities. A key threshold is the “imminent and definite” closure standard, which permits the Board to dismiss a representation petition when an employer can demonstrate that the unit in question will cease operations within a short window, typically around 90 days. The recent SolarMovil PR LLC decision from Region 12 crystallizes this test by requiring concrete, documentary proof—such as fixed‑date contracts, production metrics, and credible testimony—rather than speculative forecasts. By applying the same logic used in earlier cases, the regional director reinforced that the Board’s primary concern is whether an election would have any practical effect.

For firms that rely on project‑based or seasonal labor—especially in construction, renewable energy, and infrastructure—this ruling underscores the importance of rigorous record‑keeping. Employers should archive contracts with explicit end dates, maintain up‑to‑date production reports, and log any extensions or layoff schedules. Equally critical is transparent communication: informing workers at hiring and throughout the project about the temporary nature of the assignment bolsters the employer’s evidentiary position and may also satisfy WARN Act notice thresholds. By treating temporary crews as full NLRA participants, companies avoid surprise hearings and preserve operational flexibility.

The decision is likely to influence how labor counsel advises clients across sectors with cyclical workforces. Anticipating NLRB scrutiny, legal teams will draft more detailed project timelines and develop communication protocols that can be quickly produced in a representation dispute. While the ruling does not expand the Board’s authority, it clarifies the evidentiary bar, prompting employers to proactively manage documentation to mitigate litigation costs. As the renewable‑energy boom accelerates, similar project‑closure scenarios will arise, making the SolarMovil precedent a valuable reference point for both employers and unions navigating the evolving labor‑law landscape.

NLRB Region 12 Reinforces Imminent Closure Standard in SolarMovil PR LLC Decision

Published January 21, 2026

On January 21, 2026, the NLRB regional director (RD) for Region 12 issued a decision in SolarMovil PR LLC that provides timely and practical guidance for employers operating with project‑based, temporary, construction‑driven workforces, or are closing shop. While a regional director decision is not a binding decision of the NLRB, the case provides guidance on when the NLRB will dismiss a union petition to be certified as bargaining representative of the employer’s employees because an employer’s operations are ending imminently, and what evidence an employer must present to have the petition dismissed on such grounds.

Below we provide a breakdown of the decision and the key lessons for employers.

1. Should the NLRB Hold an Election When Work Is Ending?

On December 2, 2025, the union filed a petition to represent the employer’s solar installation employees working at a specific solar farm in Puerto Rico. A hearing was held before the RD on December 11, 2025. At the hearing, the employer argued the petition should be dismissed because:

• The project was temporary;

• The company’s work was 82 % complete as of the hearing; and

• All employees were expected to be laid off in January 2026 when the job ended.

The RD agreed and dismissed the petition, holding that a union election would serve no purpose because the employer’s operations at the project were “imminently and definitely” ending.

2. When Is Cessation “Imminent and Definite” According to the NLRB?

The NLRB requires concrete evidence, not mere speculation, that operations will cease soon. In this case, the RD pointed to:

• A written contract showing a fixed project end date.

• Credible testimony that work had been extended only into January 2026.

• No evidence of future work in Puerto Rico.

• Substantial completion of the contract’s required work (82 %).

The RD found that this combination met the Board’s standard that cessation was “imminent and definite.”

Employer Takeaway: If your organization is winding down (overall or for a specific project), documenting the timeline and communicating with employees is critical. The Board looks for clear, objective evidence rather than aspirational plans or tentative possibilities.

3. Job Completion Within 3‑4 Months Is Enough to Dismiss a Petition

This decision reaffirms longstanding NLRB precedent: If an employer’s operations end within approximately 90 days of a representation hearing, the Board is likely to dismiss a petition. The RD cited multiple cases finding that elections serve no purpose when:

• Projects will close within 3‑4 months.

• Employees will be laid off at project completion.

• Employer’s future operations are uncertain or speculative.

Employer Takeaway: For employers with short‑term projects or cyclical work, understanding this timeline is crucial when responding to a representation petition.

4. Temporary Workforces Still Trigger NLRA Obligations

Although SolarMovil’s workers were temporary, the employer still had to:

• Participate in a hearing;

• Provide evidence of project timelines; and

• Allow the union to present arguments.

The case wasn’t dismissed simply because employees were project‑based. It was dismissed because the employer proved the jobs were ending imminently.

Employer Takeaway: Being a temporary or project‑based employer does not exempt you from union activity or the NLRA. Well‑maintained documentation of project duration can be pivotal.

5. Notice to Employees Matters

The SolarMovil decision highlighted that employees:

• Were told when they were hired that the job was temporary.

• Were informed when the project end date was extended and when the project would end.

• Had not been told the business itself was closing—but that didn’t matter, because the unit (the workers at that project) would be fully laid off upon completion of the project.

Employer Takeaway: Clear, consistent communication to employees about project timelines strengthens an employer’s position in a representation dispute tied to project completion. Complying with the above may also avoid federal WARN Act notice obligations.

6. Documentation is Key to Prevailing

SolarMovil succeeded largely because it had hard evidence, including:

• Contract documents with defined scopes and deadlines;

• Production reports showing near completion; and

• Credible testimony from a supervisor with firsthand knowledge.

Employer Takeaway: To successfully argue project completion, employers should retain:

• Contracts and amendments;

• Deployment schedules;

• Production reports;

• Layoff timelines;

• Employee communications.

Well‑documented operational facts carry significant weight.

Bottom Line for Employers

The SolarMovil decision offers clarity and reassurance for employers with short‑term, project‑based, construction operations, or who are closing shop:

• The NLRB will dismiss a union petition when an employer can prove that operations are ending soon.

• Employers must present documented, objective evidence of project end dates and workforce layoffs.

• Clear communications, accurate data tracking, and consistent documentation play a critical role in resolving representation disputes.

For employers that frequently staff temporary projects or are closing shop, this ruling underscores the importance of aligning hiring practices, internal communications, contract records, and project records so that the employer can demonstrate when and how operations are expected to conclude.