Latest NLRB Big Labor Handout – Ambush “Elections”

If punishing employees in Right to Work states isn't enough to please the union bosses, then the NLRB continues to try. Their latest giveaway is an effort to impose "quickie elections" -- a blatant effort to ensure that workers do not get both sides of the unionization issue. The Washington Examiner's Philip Klein looks at the latest union bailout: With union membership precipitously declining (it was less than 7 percent in the private sector last year), big labor has been desperate to expand its ranks by any means necessary. As Peter Schaumber, former NLRB chairman, warned last week, "Imagine a political election in which only one party were given the opportunity to tell voters its side of the story, and could set an election date only days away, all without prior notice to the other side."
DeMint continues sounding alarm about NLRB's attempted Boeing Coup d'état

DeMint continues sounding alarm about NLRB's attempted Boeing Coup d'état

South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint takes on the NLRB again his Human Events column: Like so many federal programs, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has expanded its mission far beyond its original purpose in order to wage ideological battles on the taxpayers’ dime. The NLRB was never meant to micromanage where companies can locate or how many products they can manufacture, as the NLRB under the Obama administration is currently seeking to do. To stop it, Congress should exercise its power of the purse to return the board to its original mission. The NLRB was originally established to oversee union elections and investigate violations of federal labor laws. These days it’s doing less of that than ever. In 1980, the NLRB conducted 8,531 union elections around the country, with a budget of $108 million. In 2009, it oversaw only 1,704 union elections, with a budget of $261 million. Union membership has plummeted by more than 40% since the 1980s. The rapid collapse of organized labor in America’s private sector has reduced the need for union elections—and thus, the NLRB itself—by 80% over the last three decades. Yet its budget—adjusted for inflation—remains essentially unchanged. Hence the board’s recent drift into freelance assaults on economic freedom: While 20% of its budget may be needed to perform its real job, the board seems to be misusing the other 80% for ideological mischief. The current NLRB is expanding its mission far beyond the original intent. Consider what Craig Becker, an NLRB appointee who was rejected by the Senate and then recess-appointed by President Obama, has said. “Just as U.S. citizens cannot opt against having a congressman, workers should not be able to choose against having a union as theirmonopoly-bargaining agent.” Not only has the NLRB launched an unprecedented attack on right-to-work states and job creators, it is now actively silencing nonunion workers in order to give unions a leg up in its legal case against The Boeing Company. This branch of the federal government, charged with protecting workers' rights, is suing a company on behalf of workers who are not in danger of losing their jobs, while refusing to listen to the concerns of three workers whose jobs actually are threatened by the NLRB's own actions. And the NLRB is now suing two states, Arizona and South Dakota, in an effort to overturn democratically passed laws that protect a worker's right to a secret ballot in those states. The NLRB is actually taking the stance that union bosses should be able to force workers to sign cards in public to join a union, a practice known as "card check," instead of making the decision in private without fear of intimidation. This is not enforcement—this is extremism.
DeMint continues sounding alarm about NLRB's attempted Boeing Coup d'état

DeMint continues sounding alarm about NLRB's attempted Boeing Coup d'état

South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint takes on the NLRB again his Human Events column: Like so many federal programs, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has expanded its mission far beyond its original purpose in order to wage ideological battles on the taxpayers’ dime. The NLRB was never meant to micromanage where companies can locate or how many products they can manufacture, as the NLRB under the Obama administration is currently seeking to do. To stop it, Congress should exercise its power of the purse to return the board to its original mission. The NLRB was originally established to oversee union elections and investigate violations of federal labor laws. These days it’s doing less of that than ever. In 1980, the NLRB conducted 8,531 union elections around the country, with a budget of $108 million. In 2009, it oversaw only 1,704 union elections, with a budget of $261 million. Union membership has plummeted by more than 40% since the 1980s. The rapid collapse of organized labor in America’s private sector has reduced the need for union elections—and thus, the NLRB itself—by 80% over the last three decades. Yet its budget—adjusted for inflation—remains essentially unchanged. Hence the board’s recent drift into freelance assaults on economic freedom: While 20% of its budget may be needed to perform its real job, the board seems to be misusing the other 80% for ideological mischief. The current NLRB is expanding its mission far beyond the original intent. Consider what Craig Becker, an NLRB appointee who was rejected by the Senate and then recess-appointed by President Obama, has said. “Just as U.S. citizens cannot opt against having a congressman, workers should not be able to choose against having a union as theirmonopoly-bargaining agent.” Not only has the NLRB launched an unprecedented attack on right-to-work states and job creators, it is now actively silencing nonunion workers in order to give unions a leg up in its legal case against The Boeing Company. This branch of the federal government, charged with protecting workers' rights, is suing a company on behalf of workers who are not in danger of losing their jobs, while refusing to listen to the concerns of three workers whose jobs actually are threatened by the NLRB's own actions. And the NLRB is now suing two states, Arizona and South Dakota, in an effort to overturn democratically passed laws that protect a worker's right to a secret ballot in those states. The NLRB is actually taking the stance that union bosses should be able to force workers to sign cards in public to join a union, a practice known as "card check," instead of making the decision in private without fear of intimidation. This is not enforcement—this is extremism.

Who Likes the Secret Ballot Now?

After trying to eliminate the secret ballot election in the workplace, Big Labor is now demanding a secret ballot election. From the Heritage Foundation: Secret ballots protect voters from intimidation. As long as a vote remains private, no one can retaliate against individuals for voting the “wrong” way. The leadership of the union movement wants to replace secret ballot union elections with “card-check”—a system where workers would unionize by signing union cards in the presence of union organizers. Publicly, union leaders insist that union organizers would never intimidate workers if they knew how they voted. But it turns out union bosses know full well that without secret ballots, union organizers would intimidate workers. Two unions, the International Association of Machinists (IAM) and the Association of Flight Attendants–Communications Workers of America (AFA–CWA) are vying to represent workers at the newly merged United–Continental airlines.
Taxpayers to Realize More Losses on GM Bailout

Taxpayers to Realize More Losses on GM Bailout

Meanwhile, United Autoworkers Union Bosses Pocket $3.4 Billion (Source: May 2011 NRTWC Newsletter) In late 2008, GOP President George W. Bush "loaned" a total of $19.4 billion in federal taxpayers' money to the Big Labor-controlled General Motors Corporation (GM). Mr. Bush assured taxpayers they would get their money back. But by the spring of 2009, we learned we would never get back any of the money Mr. Bush had handed over to GM shortly before he left office. His successor as President, Democrat Barack Obama, announced GM would never have to settle up with taxpayers. President Obama simultaneously earmarked an additional $30 billion in taxpayers' money to by-then bankrupt GM. In exchange, taxpayers got a 61% stake in the money-losing company. Echoing Mr. Bush, Mr. Obama and his advisors insisted that, when the government eventually sold off its whole stake in GM, taxpayers would get the entire $30 billion back, and perhaps even reap a profit. Just last August, the President said it again. He told a CNBC interviewer: "We expect taxpayers will get back all the money my Administration has invested in GM." 'Government Officials Are Willing to Take the Loss'
Union Czar's Famous Boast Illuminates Today's State Fiscal Crises

Union Czar's Famous Boast Illuminates Today's State Fiscal Crises

'In a Sense,' We 'Elect Our Own Boss' (Source: May 2011 NRTWC Newsletter) An October 27, 1975 New York magazine feature article by journalist Ken Auletta examined the causes of the Big Apple's financial implosion that year. Three-and-a-half decades later, the article is still remembered for a remarkable quote from government union bigwig Victor Gotbaum. The then-head of the extraordinarily powerful, Manhattan-based District Council 37 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union had "recently remarked," the story reported: "We have the ability, in a sense, to elect our own boss." Mr. Gotbaum was alluding to the fact that, in jurisdictions like New York, where union monopoly bargaining over the pay, benefits, and working conditions of public servants is authorized by law, union bosses negotiate with government officials over such issues. At the same time, government union chiefs funnel a huge portion of the (often compulsory) dues and fees they collect from unionized workers into efforts to influence the outcomes of local and state elections. And the outcomes of those elections often determine who represents the public at the bargaining table. "In city after city and state after state, union bosses wield their privilege to force public employees to pay union dues, or be fired, to amass huge war chests, with which they support and oppose candidates for public office," explained National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix. "Big Labor thus determines who sits on one side of the bargaining table, and heavily influences who sits on the other. It is a terrible conflict of interest, which Victor Gotbaum plainly recognized, even as he bragged about it.
Union Czar's Famous Boast Illuminates Today's State Fiscal Crises

Union Czar's Famous Boast Illuminates Today's State Fiscal Crises

'In a Sense,' We 'Elect Our Own Boss' (Source: May 2011 NRTWC Newsletter) An October 27, 1975 New York magazine feature article by journalist Ken Auletta examined the causes of the Big Apple's financial implosion that year. Three-and-a-half decades later, the article is still remembered for a remarkable quote from government union bigwig Victor Gotbaum. The then-head of the extraordinarily powerful, Manhattan-based District Council 37 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union had "recently remarked," the story reported: "We have the ability, in a sense, to elect our own boss." Mr. Gotbaum was alluding to the fact that, in jurisdictions like New York, where union monopoly bargaining over the pay, benefits, and working conditions of public servants is authorized by law, union bosses negotiate with government officials over such issues. At the same time, government union chiefs funnel a huge portion of the (often compulsory) dues and fees they collect from unionized workers into efforts to influence the outcomes of local and state elections. And the outcomes of those elections often determine who represents the public at the bargaining table. "In city after city and state after state, union bosses wield their privilege to force public employees to pay union dues, or be fired, to amass huge war chests, with which they support and oppose candidates for public office," explained National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix. "Big Labor thus determines who sits on one side of the bargaining table, and heavily influences who sits on the other. It is a terrible conflict of interest, which Victor Gotbaum plainly recognized, even as he bragged about it.

"Thanks to my Spider sense, I am freed from those who have deceived me"

Right to Work: Spider Senses Tingling From the Foster's Daily Democrat State Rep. Steve Vaillancourt makes the case for enacting Right to Work: Until the last few weeks, right to work has always been a close call for me. In years past, I have opposed the bill after buying into the argument that one should not benefit from union contracts unless one pays the cost of negotiating them. It was a close call because then as now, I believe the individual should control his or her own life without being coerced into joining anything. Thus, I have always seen a conflict of two principles and have to weigh their importance. This year, with the Daniels amendment, the conflict was removed, and I voted for right to work. It remained a close call, l but the Daniels amendment tipped the scales to supporting the bill. Even with the Daniels amendment gone, I continue to support the right to work bill, and guess what. It's no longer a close call. I'm now a staunch supporter of the bill and urge all my Republican colleagues, especially those who like me have been on the fence in the past, to vote to override the governor's veto. Clearly, unions were using the payment for negotiation argument as nothing more than a red herring. How do I know this? Because, when they refused to budge in their total opposition to the bill, even when the Daniels amendment was added, my Spider senses startled tingling. That's a phrase I use to describe when I begin to realize that I'm being taken for a fool, that those trying to convince me are in fact being less than totally honest.
"Thanks to my Spider sense, I am freed from those who have deceived me"

"Thanks to my Spider sense, I am freed from those who have deceived me"

Right to Work: Spider Senses Tingling From the Foster's Daily Democrat State Rep. Steve Vaillancourt makes the case for enacting Right to Work: Until the last few weeks, right to work has always been a close call for me. In years past, I have opposed the bill after buying into the argument that one should not benefit from union contracts unless one pays the cost of negotiating them. It was a close call because then as now, I believe the individual should control his or her own life without being coerced into joining anything. Thus, I have always seen a conflict of two principles and have to weigh their importance. This year, with the Daniels amendment, the conflict was removed, and I voted for right to work. It remained a close call, l but the Daniels amendment tipped the scales to supporting the bill. Even with the Daniels amendment gone, I continue to support the right to work bill, and guess what. It's no longer a close call. I'm now a staunch supporter of the bill and urge all my Republican colleagues, especially those who like me have been on the fence in the past, to vote to override the governor's veto. Clearly, unions were using the payment for negotiation argument as nothing more than a red herring. How do I know this? Because, when they refused to budge in their total opposition to the bill, even when the Daniels amendment was added, my Spider senses startled tingling. That's a phrase I use to describe when I begin to realize that I'm being taken for a fool, that those trying to convince me are in fact being less than totally honest.