Pro-Forced Unionism Senators Feel the Heat

(Click here to download the April 2014 National Right to Work Committee Newsletter)

Survey 2014 Leaves Forced-Unionism Allies With No Way to Hide

A little more than five years ago, then-U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), working hand-in-hand with the National Right to Work Committee, forced his colleagues to vote directly on the federal policy of compulsory unionism.

The January 2009 vote spotlighted senators who support firing workers if they do not pay money to a union.

“The roll call on Jim DeMint’s Right to Work Amendment to S.181, the so-called ‘Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act,’ was a test — a test to see which senators are for freedom and which are for coercion,” said Committee President Mark Mix.

Vulnerable Big Labor Senators Voted to Corral Their Own Constituents Into Unions

“And this year,” he continued, “13 senators who publicly cast their ballots to force hardworking Americans to pay union dues or fees just to get a job or keep their jobs will finally have to face the judgment of the voters in their home states in order to retain their seats.

“In order to ensure, to the best of our ability, that Big Labor and Big Labor-appeasing senators who voted to perpetuate compulsory unionism and are up for re-election this year are held accountable by their pro-Right to Work constituents, Committee leaders are now implementing the federal Survey 2014.”

At this writing, it appears that up to 10 senators who voted for compulsory unionism in 2009 will face difficult or potentially difficult 2014 primary and/or general-election campaigns to remain in office.

Among the most vulnerable union-label senators on the ballot this year are Kay Hagan (D-N.C.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), and Mark Pryor (D-Ark.).

All three of these senators represent states that have enacted Right to Work laws.

But by opposing the DeMint Amendment, they nevertheless ensured that many of their own constituents, as well as millions of residents of states that lack Right to Work protections, would continue to be forced to fork over union dues or fees as a job condition.

That’s because federally-imposed loopholes in the 24 state Right to Work laws force hundreds of thousands of residents employed in the airline and railroad industries, as well as private-sector workers holding jobs located on so-called “exclusive” federal enclaves, to bankroll a union, or be fired.

Committee’s Goal Is to Revoke Longstanding Big Labor Privileges

The only means on the table at this time to ensure such employees’ Right to Work is protected is enactment of federal forced-dues repeal legislation such as the DeMint Amendment.

Mr. Mix commented: “Right to Work members and supporters want a Congress with the fortitude to move to take away, even over the objections of a Big Labor President, the forced-unionism powers that union bosses have wielded for more than three-quarters of a century.

“The Committee’s Survey 2014 is critical for this long-term objective.”

As many Committee members know, the federal candidate survey asks candidates to commit themselves to oppose forced unionism and support national Right to Work legislation if elected.

Senate and House candidates are given several chances to return their surveys and answer 100% in favor of Right to Work.

And millions of grass-roots Right to Work supporters are mobilized to lobby candidates to respond to their Right to Work surveys.

“All major-party candidates as well as key significant third-party and independent candidates in every U.S. Senate and House race are asked to participate in the Right to Work survey program,” said Mr. Mix.

“And pro-Right to Work citizens in every state where there’s a Senate race and every House district are contacted and requested to help turn up the pressure on their candidates to respond to their surveys.

“But the Committee pours the vast majority of its survey resources into and mobilizes far more freedom-loving activists for Senate and House races in which at least one candidate has taken a strong stand in favor of Right to Work.

“We can’t be sure at this time, but, contingent on what happens over the next few months, the Committee survey program may well be targeting Senate races in Alaska, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia this year, along with the races in Arkansas, Louisiana, and North Carolina.”

Union-Label Politicians Can Pledge to Change, or Face Potential Political Fallout

The federal Survey 2014 is giving union-label politicians like Kay Hagan, Mary Landrieu, and Mark Pryor a choice: pledge to change course and support Right to Work in the future, or face the potential political fallout.

Regardless of their party affiliation, union-label politicians and Big Labor appeasers will have no way to hide this year.

The stakes are extraordinarily high. Within the next few months, a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) made up entirely of members selected by pro-forced unionism President Barack Obama is poised to impose sweeping changes to decades-old procedures under which Big Labor may obtain monopoly control over workers.

Among the proposals the NLRB is likely to ram through soon are new rules mandating that employers hand over employee phone numbers and e-mail addresses to union organizers at the outset of each certification campaign.

‘Ambush’ Elections Would Deny Workers a Meaningful Vote

The only way Congress can possibly derail this bureaucratic power grab until President Obama leaves the White House in January 2017 is through use of the federal purse strings.

The NLRB cannot operate without taxpayers’ money.

But Kay Hagan, Mary Landrieu, and Mark Pryor, along with a number of other Big Labor senators seeking re-election this year such as Mark Warner (D-Va.), Mark Begich (D-Alaska), and Mark Udall (D-Colo.), have track records of opposing congressional efforts to rein in Barack Obama’s rogue NLRB.

Besides expanding greatly the amount of employee personal information employers are forced to divulge to Big Labor, the looming NLRB scheme would reduce sharply the current median time frame of 38 days between the filing of a union “representation petition” and the holding of a union election.

“By denying employers enough time to make their case, the NLRB’s ‘ambush’ elections plan will inevitably deny employees the opportunity to hear both sides of the story before voting on unionization,” charged Mr. Mix.

“America needs a Congress that will fight back against the Obama NLRB. And the federal Survey 2014 can help give us one.”