Patriot Action Network

-By Warner Todd Huston

We’ve been talking for the better part of the year about how the Obama administration is using its powers to regulate labor and business relations to attack Boeing aircraft manufacturer for attempting to open a new manufacturing plant in North Carolina. Fortunately, there is one proposed law floating around in congress that would stop some of the abuse of power that Obama is indulging at the behest of big labor unions. It is called the Secret Ballot Protection Act. We need to urge congress to pass it.

To briefly recap, Obama has been trying to punish Boeing — and by extension sending a warning to all American businesses — for having the gall to want to build a new manufacturing plant in North Carolina. Even though Boeing would be brining thousands of jobs to North Carolina, Obama wants Boeing to be prevented from doing so and he wants to punish the southern states, as well.

This may sound incongruous, an American president trying to destroy jobs and business alike, but when the reason is discovered it reveals many things, this most especially: Obama has gotten his marching orders from unions and he is misusing his powers to regulate to fulfill the desires of Big Labor.

You see, Boeing is closing a plant in Washington State because unions there have launched so many strikes, have sabotaged manufacturing, and made the cost of business so expensive that Boeing wanted to give North Carolina, a right-to-work state, a shot at the business.

But then comes Big Labor’s bought and paid for president who decided that he could use his powers to regulate labor to prevent an American business from opening a new branch of its business in one of our own states.

Because Big Labor would lose a handful of jobs in Washington State (only to gain some in North Carolina), Obama decided that an American business wasn’t “allowed” to open a new plant at any location in this country that it wants to open a business. This assumed power is unprecedented and certainly quite un-American.

This isn’t the only illicit use of labor regulations that Obama is perpetrating. He is also using his National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to prevent business and employees alike from having enough time to fully explore the offerings of unions and business when employees are considering whether or not they wish to unionize their workplace.

The NLRB wants to severely shorten the time period between when a union confronts employees and they have to vote upon whether or not they will accept unionization. It currently takes up to 38 days for unions and employers to have the time to inform employees about what they are offering before the employees have to vote. Obama’s NLRB wants to slash that to 21 days.

Such a short period of time hurts business, union and employee alike as less time until a called vote prevents more informed employees.

One other thing that Big Labor wants Obama to install on our work force is something called Card Check (The Employee Free Choice Act, or EFCA). This card check provision would take away from employees the centuries old right to a secret election when they are voting for unionization of their workplace.

Taking away the secret ballot means that employees have to vote in a form that allows everyone to see how they voted. This leaves employees open for harassment from union thugs and employers alike.

One way to prevent the loss of the secret election is to get congress to vote in the Secret Ballot Protection Act [H.R. 972 and S. 217].

There needs to be a slight change to this bill, though. LaborUnionReport talks about that change.

Introduced in the Senate back in January by Jim DeMint [R-SC] and the House in March by Rep. Phil Roe [R-TN], the Secret Ballot Protection Act would ensure that employees have a right to decide on the question of unionization through a secret ballot. More importantly, it would end, once and for all, the deceptive practice of card check which gives union organizers the ability to trick workers into signing their rights over to a union.

Given the current debate over the NLRB’s proposed rules to hold ambush elections, a simple sentence can be added to the bill that states: No election shall take place within 35 days following the filing of a petition, nor on a date to exceed 56 days following the filing of a petition.

By inserting a sentence into the Secret Ballot Protection Act that establishes specific timetables, this would negate management’s alleged stalling during certification elections, as well as negate union stalling during decertification elections.

Things like this can stymie Obama’s misuse of his power to regulate business and labor and prevent his payback to the unions that paid for him to win election.

In this horrid economy, in a day when job loss is endemic, these common sense limits of the jobs-killing effects of unions is something this country sorely needs.

Tagged with:
 

-By Warner Todd Huston

Imagine the gall of Gordon L. Wray Jr. to die without first getting Obama’s permission! I mean, it takes a real yutz to die before The One waves his royal hand in forbearance, ya know? So, to punish the dead, Obama sent his National Labor Relations Board goosetepping to threaten the man… the, the dead man.

“Every week the NLRB publishes a summary of NLRB decisions,” LaborUnionReport informs us. “In the Board’s latest weekly summary, there was one decision summary that seemed rather unique…”

As it happens the “unique” decision that the NLRB made was that dying wasn’t enough of an excuse to get out of answering to Obama and his union-bought-and-paid-for regulatory agency.

The Board granted the Acting General Counsel’s Motion for Default Judgment based on the Respondent’s failure to file an answer to the complaint. The Board found that the death of BLSI, LLC’s owner and the insolvency of his estate did not constitute good cause for the Respondent’s failure to answer the complaint.

Got that. The death of the business owner “did not constitute good cause” for his not kowtowing to Obama’s NLRB. So a default judgement was levied upon him. Yeah. The dead guy was just told he better answer to Obama’s little board.

Wray dared die before answering to the NLRB. Who does he think he is, anyway?

So, how did this all happen? Well, Mr. Wray’s business, BLSI Construction Services & Grounds Care, found its employees attempting to get the International Union of Operating Engineers to unionize them. Pursuant to that desire, the AFL-CIO and the Operating Engineers sent the company a request to begin the process of unionization.

The company never replied. As it happens, Mr. Wray died before the union was ever certified and his estate was mired in financial troubles, even being ruled insolvent. So, it’s no wonder that he never replied to the union’s demands.

The NLRB insists this dead man is engaging in “unfair labor practices.”

Having found that the Respondent has engaged in certain unfair labor practices, we shall order it to cease and desist and to take certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies of the Act. Specifically, having found that the Respondent has violated Section 8(a)(1) and (5) of the Act by failing and refusing to bargain with the Union, we shall order it to cease and desist therefrom and to bargain on request with the Union, and, if an understanding is reached, to embody the understanding in a signed agreement. To ensure that the employees are ac-corded the services of their selected bargaining agent for the period provided by law, we shall construe the initial period of the certification as beginning the date the Respondent begins to bargain in good faith with the Union.

I wonder how the NLRB plans to enforce their little judgment?

I think the NLRB and its enforcers better plan their next action for a full moon on Halloween so that Mr. Wray can rise up from the grave and shuffle his ol’ desiccating corpse self into their offices to answer for his apostasy. I think that is about the only way they will get satisfaction for their little “judgment,” anyway.

Still, all funnin’ aside, this incident really does show the arrogance of Obama’s administration and his union-favoring NLRB. They even favor unions over death! This incident is quite instructive, really.

Tagged with:
 

-By Warner Todd Huston

On Sept. 18th and 19th in Washington DC, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is having open meetings for public comment on its proposal to slash the amount of time that it takes for prospective unionization of employees to occur. If you are at all interested in preventing this wild powergrab by Obama’s union-sold NLRB, you should try to attend these meetings.

The NLRB had proposed rules changes that will severely shorten the amount of time between when a union requests a vote of employees for a business to become organized that is not currently unionized. It used to take four or five weeks or more for this process to wind through the NLRB, but the rules change would shorten that to less than 21 days.

This shortened consideration period will prevent prospective members from having enough time to fully learn about the union that is attempting to gain their trust not to mention that businesses will have little time to reply to the charges leveled against them by union representatives.

This is the same NLRB that tried to punish Boeing for wanting to build a new manufacturing plant in South Carolina, an illicit action that even one of Obama’s own czars is against.

Here is the NLRB’s announcement:

Details released on July 18-19 open meeting about proposed election rule amendments

More than 60 speakers from the business, labor, academic and advocacy communities have registered to make presentations at the National Labor Relations Board’s open meeting on its recently-proposed election rule amendments, which will be held over two days, on July 18 and 19.

Including the speakers, more than 150 people have registered to attend the event, which will be held from 9 am to 4 pm in the NLRB’s Margaret A. Browning Hearing Room at 1099 14th St NW, in Washington DC. Doors will open at 8 am and attendees must bring a photo ID and go through a security checkpoint to enter the building. Because of the large number of registered attendees, seating for non-speakers will be by order of arrival.

The event is open to the public. People who have not already registered will be seated if space is available. Overflow rooms with closed circuit video will be provided for those who are unable to secure a seat in the hearing room. Attendees should contact the NLRB if a sign language interpreter or other assistance is needed.

The meeting will also be webcast in its entirety, with a link provided on the agency’s website at www.nlrb.gov.

A schedule of speakers will be made available prior to the meeting date. All four current Board members are expected to attend and may ask questions following the presentations.

Working members of the media who wish to attend should contact the Office of Public Affairs at 202-273-1991.

Public comments on the proposed amendments may also be submitted in writing by August 22, 2011, either electronically through www.regulations.gov or by mail or hand delivery to Lester A. Heltzer, Executive Secretary, NLRB, 1099 14th Street NW, Washington DC 20570. Responses to the initial comments may be filed during an additional 14 day period thereafter.

Tagged with:
 

Larry Getts testified before Congress on what a bad idea the new laws are being proposed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The proposed rules change will speed up to only a few weeks the process of newly unionizing the employees a business. Currently it can take more than a month for that process.

See VideoHERE

Business advocates claim that this rules change would fast track unions and prevent prospective members from being able to learn all sides of the issues so that they can cast an informed vote to join a union.

Tagged with:
 

Last week, the union extremists controlling the U.S. Department of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board conducted a coordinated attack on America’s job creators. The first punch, a 160-page rule-making proposal by the Department of Labor was issued on Monday for public comments. However, it was quickly drowned out by the second punch: Tuesday’s NLRB rule-making proposal to modify election procedures, which are intended to fast track union elections giving unions greater ability to unionize employees.

It is important to note that both rule-making proposals are intended to work together and, like an axe in an executioner’s hand, they are intended to make an employer’s resistance to unionization futile.

On the one hand, the NLRB’s proposal to ‘streamline’ union elections is meant to make it easier for unions to unionize employers in the least amount of time with the least amount of resistance, while giving union organizers access to employee telephone numbers and e-mail addresses and drastically curtailing employers’ ability to appeal NLRB decisions…

Read the rest at >LaborUnionReport.com.

Tagged with:
 

With one regulatory decision after anther, Obama’s National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has repeatedly abused its position and lent its powers to come to the material aid of Big Labor. This week we see the NLRB coming to the aid of unions yet again by changing rules to fast track union votes in businesses not yet suffering under union control.

The NLRB has ruled that unions trying to strong arm their way into businesses will now be afforded a sort of fast tracked voting process meant to give both businesses and employees far, far less time to learn about and understand the issues surrounding a vote in favor of unionization.

Currently when a union wants to get itself certified in a new company the NLRB takes between five and six weeks to conduct the elections. Under the NLRB’s new rules that time period will be shorted to a scant 10 to 21 days.

Now why is this a big deal? Former Chairman and NLRB member Peter Schaumber, appointed in 2001 by George W. Bush, says that this shortened time will harm businesses, especially small and mid-sized businesses that have little knowledge about unions and no attorneys with specialized union experience with which to protect themselves.

Schaumber recently told reporters to imagine if you were a small business and you had never heard of the NLRB and had no expertise in its arcane practices. He then laid out a scenario by which an employer could become a target of the union after the elections for all sorts of violations that he, the employer, didn’t even know existed.

This is precisely the sort of trap that the NLRB hopes to set for the business community.

In light of this, imagine how much damage that these fast tracked elections could do to business. It should be remembered that the teams that unions send out to implement certification elections are essentially salesmen and are not really interested in impartially representing employees. They most certainly are not there to help employers understand the process and what might happen after certification.

This new rule is also bad for employees. Employees are badly served by a fast track process that prevents them from hearing all parties concerned in a certification election. But Big Labor wants to make sure that employees only hear the union side of the story. There is something distinctly un-American in this refusal by unions to allow employees to hear all sides of the story so that they can make an informed decision about certifying a union.

As labor expert James Sherk says, “Workers’ deserve the right to hear from both sides and have time for reflection. The NLRB’s proposed rule directly attacks their right to make an informed choice. It is the latest example of the Administration putting unions’ institutional interests above the rights of workers.”

So what exactly is wrong with allowing employees the right to hear all sides and to become informed voters? What are the unions afraid of?

Perhaps the fact that union membership is lower than it has ever been tells that story?

Tagged with: