NLRB Bias is a Menace to Business; Obama and NLRB rushing into Ambush Election Rules for Unions



From The Post and Courier:

November 21, 2011


When so many of our fellow citizens are looking for work and America is competing against other countries to land businesses, the National Labor Relations Board continues to pursue an activist, politically motivated agenda thwarting economic recovery and continuing to place our companies at a competitive disadvantage worldwide.

Virtually everyone is familiar with the most glaring example of overreach and union pandering, which is the complaint against Boeing.

Despite not a single example of job loss and despite not a single worker benefit in Washington State being lost, the NLRB sued Boeing seeking to have it close its South Carolina plant, displace the workers hired, and return the work to Washington State.

That is Exhibit A in proving the NLRB has become a sycophant for Big Labor but is by no means the only piece of evidence.

Currently, union elections take place on average within 31 days of the filing of an election petition. Additionally, unions are victorious more often than not when there is an election, but that is not good enough.

Unions want more, so they persuaded the NLRB to propose sweeping changes to the election process, shifting the balance of power even further toward union seeking employees.

By promoting “rush elections,” and ruling that elections can take place in as little as 10 days, the board severely limits the opportunity for workers to hear all sides of the issue and make an informed decision.

Additionally, employers would have only seven days to retain legal counsel and decipher the complex labyrinth of federal labor law before presenting their case before an NLRB hearing officer.

House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman John Kline smartly introduced H.R. 3094, the Workforce Democracy and Fairness Act, to level the playing field. This legislation requires no union election occur in less than 35 days, thus granting all parties the ability to present their arguments and ensuring workers have the ability to reach an informed decision.

H.R. 3094 acknowledges that full and complete information is treasured when employees are contemplating how they will vote.

Ironically, some unions have already endorsed President Barack Obama’s re-election bid despite the fact that the election is well over a year away. Clearly they believe they needed the time (12 months) to inform their members of their endorsement.

However, somehow a week is enough for employers to lay out their facts prior to an election that is significant to them.

The hypocrisy and blind advocacy has to stop. The purpose of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) is to balance the rights of the employers, the employees and the general public. The NLRA is not calculated to drive up union membership because they are a loyal constituency for the Democrat Party.

More here………



LABOR UNION RELATED LINK:  Read by clicking on blue letters below.

BREAKING: Obama-NLRB Rushing to Issue Ambush Elections Rules on Nov. 30


When the NLRB’s union appointees issued the notice, it was met with a tremendous outcry from America’s employers, as well as the sole GOP member at the NLRB.

The board’s lone Republican, Brian Hayes, issued a vigorous dissent, saying the proposal would result in the type of “quickie elections” union leaders have long sought. Hayes claimed elections could be held in as little as 10 to 21 days from the filing of a petition, giving employers less of a chance to make their case.

Make no mistake, the principal purpose for this radical manipulation of our election process is to minimize or, rather, to effectively eviscerate an employer’s legitimate opportunity to express its views about collective bargaining,” Hayes wrote.

The NLRB issues a press release stating that it would be issuing its decision on November 30th.

The National Labor Relations Board has scheduled a Nov. 30 vote on whether to adopt a small number of the amendments to its election procedures that the Board proposed earlier this year.


The Board received more than 65,000 written comments on the proposal and heard testimony from 66 speakers at a two-day hearing in July. In response to those comments, and in light of the possibility that the Board will lose a quorum at the end of the current congressional session, Board Chairman Mark Pearce will propose issuing a final rule limited to several provisions designed to reduce unnecessary litigation.

The meeting of the Board’s three members, to be held at NLRB headquarters in Washington, will be open to the public, although the public may not participate. Members will discuss and vote on a resolution to accept the Chairman’s proposals, proceed to draft a final rule limited to those proposals, and defer the remainder of the proposed rule for further consideration.

Separately, in a letter dated Friday as well, Brian Hayes, the aforementioned lone Republican at the NLRB, Brian Hayes, sent a letter to Congressman John Kline [R] explaining how he has been advised that he would not be able to draft or even review the new rule until after its issuance.


IS Obama ruling by edict/fiat through the NLRB?




The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

One CommentLeave a comment

  1. […] NLRB Bias is a Menace to Business; Obama and NLRB rushing into Ambush Election Rules for Unions […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: