In connection with the recent relocation of the NLRB headquarters in Washington, D.C., the Board and the National Labor Relations Board Employees Union agreed to rules for bargaining over the relocation (“effects bargaining”) and set aside two days for bargaining sessions. After two days, the union representatives apparently weren’t done, but the Board terminated bargaining anyway. The union then filed a charge with the Federal Labor Relations Authority, alleging that the Board violated the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute. At a hearing before an administrative law judge, the Board contended that the union had waived more than two days of bargaining when it entered into the “two-day” agreement and that the parties reached impasse at day two. The ALJ saw things differently, finding that the agreement could not reasonably be interpreted as a waiver of bargaining beyond two days and that the evidence conclusively demonstrated that the parties had not reached impasse. The ALJ noted that several factors established that “there was a strong potential for further and productive bargaining, if only the Agency had the patience to persist beyond its arbitrary deadline.” The ALJ concluded that the Board violated its duty to bargain and deprived the union of a proper opportunity to negotiate the impact and implementation of the move to a new headquarters.