Lafe Solomon 'Did What IAM Bosses Told Him To'

Lafe Solomon 'Did What IAM Bosses Told Him To'

E-mails Reveal Why Top NLRB Lawyer 'Screwed up the U.S. Economy' Internal NLRB e-mails show Lafe Solomon (pictured) was disinclined this March to target Boeing for expanding production in Right to Work South Carolina. Then IAM union chiefs, led by Tom Buffenbarger, apparently got to him. Credit: AP/Bruce Smith (Source:  November-December 2011 National Right to Work Committee Newsletter) This April 20, Acting National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel Lafe Solomon ignited a public-policy firestorm by filing a complaint against Boeing for initiating a second Dreamliner 787 aircraft production line in Right to Work South Carolina. In several public statements, Boeing executives had made no bones about the fact that their decision to expand in a Right to Work state was prompted largely by their desire to avoid or at least mitigate multi-billion-dollar revenue losses stemming from disruptive strikes. Agreeing with International Association of Machinists (IAM/AFL-CIO) union kingpins who had repeatedly ordered employees at Boeing's west coast facilities out on strike, Mr. Solomon claimed these statements showed Boeing was motivated by "anti-union animus." Consequently, the South Carolina expansion was illegal, declared Mr. Solomon. Mr. Solomon's complaint asked an NLRB administrative law judge to stop Boeing's South Carolina production. Former Clinton-Appointed NLRB Chairman: Boeing Complaint Didn't 'Make Sense'
Lafe Solomon 'Did What IAM Bosses Told Him To'

Lafe Solomon 'Did What IAM Bosses Told Him To'

E-mails Reveal Why Top NLRB Lawyer 'Screwed up the U.S. Economy' Internal NLRB e-mails show Lafe Solomon (pictured) was disinclined this March to target Boeing for expanding production in Right to Work South Carolina. Then IAM union chiefs, led by Tom Buffenbarger, apparently got to him. Credit: AP/Bruce Smith (Source:  November-December 2011 National Right to Work Committee Newsletter) This April 20, Acting National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel Lafe Solomon ignited a public-policy firestorm by filing a complaint against Boeing for initiating a second Dreamliner 787 aircraft production line in Right to Work South Carolina. In several public statements, Boeing executives had made no bones about the fact that their decision to expand in a Right to Work state was prompted largely by their desire to avoid or at least mitigate multi-billion-dollar revenue losses stemming from disruptive strikes. Agreeing with International Association of Machinists (IAM/AFL-CIO) union kingpins who had repeatedly ordered employees at Boeing's west coast facilities out on strike, Mr. Solomon claimed these statements showed Boeing was motivated by "anti-union animus." Consequently, the South Carolina expansion was illegal, declared Mr. Solomon. Mr. Solomon's complaint asked an NLRB administrative law judge to stop Boeing's South Carolina production. Former Clinton-Appointed NLRB Chairman: Boeing Complaint Didn't 'Make Sense'
House Narrowly Okays Union-Only PLAs at expense of military construction

House Narrowly Okays Union-Only PLAs at expense of military construction

Although fewer than 12% of the 229 Republicans present and voting on the anti-Right to Work, pro-PLA LaTourette Amendment sided with Big Labor, that was enough for union lobbyists to grab a 204-203 victory. Handful of Big Labor-Appeasing Republicans Make the Difference (Source: July 2011 NRTWC Newsletter) Back in February 2009, one of the first actions President Barack Obama took after settling in at the White House was to issue Executive Order 13502, which promotes union-only "project labor agreements" (PLAs) on federally funded public works. In April 2010, the Obama Administration issued a "final rule" implementing the order. "E.O.13502 now pressures federal agencies to acquiesce to PLAs on all large public works," noted Greg Mourad, vice president of the National Right to Work Committee. "In practice, it is designed to force nonunion companies wishing to participate in public works using $25 million or more in federal funds to impose union monopoly bargaining on their employees and hire new workers through discriminatory union hiring halls. "Under union-only PLAs, independent workers who already have their own retirement funds are nevertheless forced to contribute to Big Labor-manipulated pension funds. "Rather than compromise the freedom of their employees and the efficiency of their operations, most independent construction firms simply refuse to submit bids on PLA projects." Results of 2010 Elections Raised Hopes of Pro-Right to Work Citizens
Right to Work Good For Pay and Benefits

Right to Work Good For Pay and Benefits

By prohibiting compulsory union dues, state Right to Work laws spur the growth of private-sector employee compensation in the form of wages, salaries, benefits and bonuses, as well as employment growth. Sources: U.S. Commerce Department, U.S. Labor Department Private-Sector Compensation Growth Lags in Forced-Unionism States (Source: June 2011 NRTWC Newsletter) Even union bosses and their apologists sometimes grudgingly admit that long-term private-sector job growth in states that currently have Right to Work laws on the books far outpaces job growth in states that lack such pro-employee statutes. This fact is indeed hard to deny. From 1990 to 2010, according to the U.S. Labor Department, private-sector payrolls in Right to Work states soared by 32.0% -- an increase triple that of forced-union-dues states combined. Over the past decade alone, nationwide private-sector employment fell by 3.3% due to the impact of the severe 2008-2009 recession. But Right to Work states experienced an overall private-sector job increase, while forced-unionism states suffered a 5.5% aggregate job loss. Big Labor tries to downplay the significance of Right to Work states' large, persistent employment-growth advantage by suggesting that the jobs created outside of forced unionism's dominion are "the wrong kind." Unfortunately for union propagandists, however, U.S. Commerce Department data show that Right to Work states also enjoy a large, persistent advantage over forced-unionism states with regard to growth of private-sector employee compensation (including wages, salaries, bonuses and benefits). Real Compensation Grew Nine Times as Much Over Past Decade In Right to Work States
Momentum Builds For National Right to Work Act

Momentum Builds For National Right to Work Act

(Source: January 2011 NRTWC Newsletter) Forced-Dues Clauses in Federal Labor Statutes Ripe For Repeal There appears to be light at the end of the forced-unionism tunnel for America's workers. In last year's elections, disgusted voters repudiated the Big Labor agenda. Now Right to Work advocates are calling on the incoming Republican U.S. House leadership to allow hearings and a vote on national Right to Work legislation some time during the 2011-2012 Congress. Although Right to Work measures have repeatedly been introduced over the years, House leaders in both parties have thwarted efforts to hold roll-call votes on legislation striking out the provisions in federal law that force millions of workers from coast to coast to pay union dues just to keep their jobs. "Naturally, Big Labor House Democrats don't want to cast public votes to force American workers to continue to subsidize their campaigns with their union dues and fees," observed Greg Mourad, legislative director for the National Right to Work Committee. "What's really strange is that, in the past, GOP speakers have been willing to let union-label Democrat politicians off the hook. But Right to Work supporters are already mobilizing to bring about a different outcome in the 112th Congress." Forced Dues Enshrined In Federal Labor Law The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which Congress first adopted in 1935 and has since only modified, not fundamentally changed, actually contains specific language protecting employee rights to join or refrain from joining a union. But it's just a cruel joke. Why? Congress gutted its pious proclamations of worker freedom with "exceptions" such as the one tacked on to NLRA Section 7. Section 7's conclusion has trampled workers' freedom for three-quarters of a century, and is one of the most cynical exercises in legislative deception on record.
Iowans Repudiate Pro-Forced Unionism Governor

Iowans Repudiate Pro-Forced Unionism Governor

Right to Work Makes Major Gains in State Legislative Contests (Source: December 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) It takes a lot to convince Iowa citizens to oust a sitting governor. Until this fall, the last time a Hawkeye State chief executive failed to get another term after seeking one was in 1962! But over the past four years, Big Labor Democrat Gov. Chet Culver wore out Iowans' considerable patience. On November 2, he was one of 13 incumbent governors on the ballot across America. Eleven of these incumbents won, but Mr. Culver lost by a hefty 53% to 43% margin. What had Chet Culver done to receive such a harsh rebuke from normally amiable Midwesterners? He tried to gut Iowa's popular Right to Work law -- and he was sneaky about it. After saying nothing about the Right to Work issue during his successful 2006 gubernatorial campaign, Mr. Culver announced, almost as soon as the votes were counted, his support for legislation imposing forced union dues and fees on Iowa workers as a condition of employment. Since Mr. Culver's fellow Democrats controlled substantial majorities in both chambers of the Iowa Legislature that greeted him upon his inauguration in early 2007, it seemed Big Labor's stealthy scheme to bring back forced unionism to the state six decades after it had been banned would succeed. For four years, Gov. Culver tried to help union bosses extract forced fees from workers who choose not to join. But freedom-loving Iowans first thwarted him legislatively and then defeated him at the polls. But the National Right to Work Committee and the Iowans for Right to Work Committee were already mobilizing resistance. Pro-Right to Work Iowan Stopped Forced-Union-Fee Schemes in 2007 and 2009 Even before the new Legislature convened in January 2007, the National Committee began sending out a series of statewide and targeted mailings to members and supporters in Iowa, with a focus on selected House and Senate members in vulnerable seats.