The Latest

Where the Boeing Controversy Was Born

The Wall Street Journal's editorial page connects the dots to discover that the NLRB's complaint against Boeing and companies moving to Right to Work states is not the actions of a rouge General Counsel but the suggestion of the Chairman of the Committee Wilma Liebman. The Obama-era National Labor Relations Board has tilted so heavily toward union interests that companies might be forgiven for thinking the process is rigged against them. A recent missive from one of the agency's top lawyers shows why. In a May 10 memo to regional staffers, Associate General Counsel Richard Siegel discusses a March case in which the NLRB sided with telecommunications company Embarq Corp. in a dispute over its decision to close a Las Vegas call center and open a bigger facility in Florida. The company refused to explain to its union the rationale for the move. In America, business decisions are made by owners or executives and are rarely subject to compulsory bargaining, while unions confine their concerns to working conditions, pay and benefits. NLRB Chairwoman Wilma Liebman, a long-time union lawyer, doesn't like that balance. "The Board's task would be easier, and more importantly, the [National Labor Relations] Act's policy of promoting collective bargaining might well be better served, if employers were required to provide unions with requested information about relocation decisions whenever there was a reasonable likelihood that labor-cost concessions might affect the decision," she wrote in her concurrence to the Embarq case. Translation: Ms. Liebman wants to force far more companies to consult unions when they want to relocate, because unions might theoretically be able to offer concessions to avert a move if they had more information. Never mind that such a rule change would be an unprecedented intrusion into boardrooms, or that unions might use collective bargaining to request reams of data, such as payrolls and tax returns, to increase their negotiating leverage. In a "future case," Ms. Liebman added, "I would be open to modifying" the rule. Wink, nudge.

Trumka's Tirade

Trumka's Tirade

AFL-CIO boss Dick Trumka speech where he issued the hollow threat to the Democrat Party to take his fidelity elsewhere, is being called Trumka's Tirade by the Pittsburgh Tribune: Big Labor boss Richard Trumka has issued an ultimatum to unions' lackeys in Congress: Meet our unrelenting demands or find another sugar daddy to fund your campaigns next year. "We will spend the summer holding elected leaders in Congress as well as the states accountable on one measure: Are they improving or degrading life for working families (of union members)?" says the AFL-CIO's Mr. Trumka. And Trumka says Democrats may be "controlling the wrecking ball" that's hurting unions. How's that for gratitude? Whereas unions, given their substantial contributions to Democrats in the last presidential election, didn't get everything on their quite lengthy wish list, they've made substantial inroads with Team Obama at the federal level. Those inroads lead to the National Labor Relations Board.

Trumka's Tirade

Trumka's Tirade

AFL-CIO boss Dick Trumka speech where he issued the hollow threat to the Democrat Party to take his fidelity elsewhere, is being called Trumka's Tirade by the Pittsburgh Tribune: Big Labor boss Richard Trumka has issued an ultimatum to unions' lackeys in Congress: Meet our unrelenting demands or find another sugar daddy to fund your campaigns next year. "We will spend the summer holding elected leaders in Congress as well as the states accountable on one measure: Are they improving or degrading life for working families (of union members)?" says the AFL-CIO's Mr. Trumka. And Trumka says Democrats may be "controlling the wrecking ball" that's hurting unions. How's that for gratitude? Whereas unions, given their substantial contributions to Democrats in the last presidential election, didn't get everything on their quite lengthy wish list, they've made substantial inroads with Team Obama at the federal level. Those inroads lead to the National Labor Relations Board.

U.S. House Representatives Grow Weary of NLRB's Truncated Responses

From the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce (5/24/2011): Kline and Roe Express Disappointment with NLRB's Inadequate Response to Congressional Inquiry   “The general counsel's office has offered to discuss our request further, and we intend to take them up on their offer.” Today, Republican leaders on the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce responded to the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) failure to provide requested documents related to its complaint filed against The Boeing Company. On May 5th, Chairman [John] Kline and Representative Phil Roe, M.D. (R-TN) requested information from the NLRB to address questions surrounding the timing of the Boeing complaint, as well as concerns about public statements made by NLRB officials. "The NLRB is not immune from congressional oversight or public scrutiny," said Chairman John Kline (R-MN). "While this insufficient response is not entirely unexpected from todays board, it is still extremely disappointing. In the case of Boeing, there are legitimate questions over public statements made by NLRB officials and the timing of its complaint. The American people deserve a full explanation and Congress has a right to a complete response. The general counsel's office has offered to discuss our request further, and we intend to take them up on their offer."

U.S. House Representatives Grow Weary of NLRB's Truncated Responses

From the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce (5/24/2011): Kline and Roe Express Disappointment with NLRB's Inadequate Response to Congressional Inquiry   “The general counsel's office has offered to discuss our request further, and we intend to take them up on their offer.” Today, Republican leaders on the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce responded to the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) failure to provide requested documents related to its complaint filed against The Boeing Company. On May 5th, Chairman [John] Kline and Representative Phil Roe, M.D. (R-TN) requested information from the NLRB to address questions surrounding the timing of the Boeing complaint, as well as concerns about public statements made by NLRB officials. "The NLRB is not immune from congressional oversight or public scrutiny," said Chairman John Kline (R-MN). "While this insufficient response is not entirely unexpected from todays board, it is still extremely disappointing. In the case of Boeing, there are legitimate questions over public statements made by NLRB officials and the timing of its complaint. The American people deserve a full explanation and Congress has a right to a complete response. The general counsel's office has offered to discuss our request further, and we intend to take them up on their offer."

Finally, Someone Takes on the Obama Administration's Big Labor Paybacks in Court

Finally, Someone Takes on the Obama Administration's Big Labor Paybacks in Court

The National Right To Work Legal Defense News Release (5/24/2011): Union Member Seeks to Block Obama Labor Department’s Efforts to Roll Back Union Disclosure Rules Department guts disclosure rule that has exposed numerous corrupt union boss schemes and let rank-and-file members know how dues are spent Washington, DC (May 23, 2011) – With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a Maryland county government employee is asking a federal court to stop the Obama Administration from allowing union bosses to conceal lavish and corrupt union expenditures from workers. Chris Mosquera, a member of a Municipal County Government Employee Local of the United Food and Commercial Worker (UFCW) union, filed the lawsuit against Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for rescinding a union boss disclosure rule which would make it less difficult for workers to hold union officials accountable. Unions covered by the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) with total annual receipts of $250,000 or more are currently required to submit annual financial statements to the U.S. Department of Labor. LM-2 forms are the public disclosure documents for these larger unions and are available online on the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) website. These forms have helped workers and citizen activists expose many unscrupulous union boss schemes, including lavish benefits to high-ranking union officials and loyalists, superfluous spending on union boss transportation (including private jets), and shady political spending (such as the Service Employees International Union bosses’ links to the disgraced political organization ACORN). Mosquera seeks to intervene for the millions of workers who are forced by federal mandate to accept union boss “representation” and pay union dues or fees to a union in order to get or keep their jobs. The lawsuit alleges that Solis exceeded her power as Secretary of Labor by repealing a January 2009 LM-2 Final Rule because the rule put a “burden” on union officials to report their expenditures to the public. However, under federal law, Solis cannot use “burden” as a justification for rescission of a rule. Solis further overstepped her legal authority by singlehandedly creating a new rule that allows union bosses to more easily evade and circumvent the LMRDA.