Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Big Laborís Stealth Card-Check Strategy (NLRB will "pass it" after election)
National Review ^ | 9/7/10 | Mix

Posted on 09/07/2010 3:46:00 PM PDT by pabianice

Having failed to pass the legislation they want, union bosses turn to the executive branch.

After spending over a billion dollars to elect Barack Obama president and Democratic majorities to Congress in 2008, Big Labor thought it had bought enough support to ram through a “card check” bill that effectively eliminates secret-ballot votes for unionization and lets federal bureaucrats dictate contracts to employees and employers.

But despite an intense, union-boss-backed lobbying campaign, attempts to pass card check stalled as elected officials felt the heat from voters, who are overwhelmingly against the bill. With a vote on the legislation unlikely between now and Election Day, opponents of card check may be tempted to rest easy, but Big Labor has other plans.

Union bosses are still intent on pushing more workers into their forced-dues-paying ranks. The only thing that’s changing is their approach, which has shifted from congressional trench warfare to executive-branch power grabs.

The harbinger of this new strategy is Obama’s appointment of Craig Becker to the powerful National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the federal agency that dictates the contours of American labor law. Becker, a former Big Labor lawyer, is a walking conflict of interest — despite a career spent crafting SEIU legal strategies, he has refused to recuse himself from several cases before the NLRB involving that union’s local affiliates.

Becker has also suggested that card-check legislation could be implemented administratively, without congressional authorization. And from his new perch at the NLRB — an agency dominated by Big Labor–friendly appointees — Becker is in a position to do just that.

Obama’s pliant NLRB has also decided to reconsider a case that would roll back worker protections during card-check organizing campaigns. Under current law, union operatives can be installed via card check only if they strike a deal with management. These “neutrality agreements,” the existence of which is normally kept secret from employees, often benefit union officials at employees’ expense.

A few years ago, the NLRB’s landmark Dana decision — won by the National Right to Work Foundation — established a few limited procedural safeguards during card-check drives. Because employees are often coerced or intimidated into signing union cards, the NLRB ruled, workers must have a 45-day “window period” after a union is installed via card check in which to challenge the results with a secret-ballot vote.

The Dana decision, while not a fix for the coercion and unreliability of card-check union drives, does provide a modicum of protection for workers who have been pushed into union ranks under questionable circumstances.

Becker denies having pre-judged the challenges to Dana, despite a long career of advocating card-check organizing. He also authored an amicus brief in the Dana case opposing any escape hatch via which employees could vote out an unwanted union.

Meanwhile, the NLRB put out feelers earlier this summer for implementing electronic unionization elections, a scheme that will likely force workers to submit votes via computers, cell phones, or PDAs. Unfortunately, there isn’t much difference between aggressive union organizers’ going door to door with authorization cards and aggressive union organizers’ going door to door with laptops. Allowing Big Labor operatives to pressure workers through electronic unionization drives would reproduce the same abuses associated with card-check organizing, and would introduce the potential for electronic fraud and hacked votes.

By cramming the NLRB full of forced-unionism operatives, Obama has successfully laid the groundwork for a stealthy push to undermine the rights of American workers. The NLRB’s administrative agenda and electronic-voting schemes now threaten to undo much of the hard work that went into defeating card-check legislation.

Some doubt that such sweeping changes could be enacted without congressional approval, but we’ve already seen Big Labor’s strategy in action. The National Mediation Board (NMB), a federal agency that governs airline and railway employees, has just enacted a far-reaching rule change that allows for workplace unionization without the consent of a true majority of employees.

Full Article...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cardcheck; obamanomics; secretballot; unions
"Unions: not just for beat-downs anymore!"
1 posted on 09/07/2010 3:46:02 PM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Another example of this reality: socialism and corruption are interchangeable terms.

Expect corruption from leftists; that way you won’t be surprised.


2 posted on 09/07/2010 3:50:11 PM PDT by lurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lurk

There is a very easy answer for this; the REpublicans, assuming they get a majority in the House, need to DEFUND the NLRB in its entirety.


3 posted on 09/07/2010 3:54:00 PM PDT by laconic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lurk

The existence of the Free World is on the line in November. March or Die.


4 posted on 09/07/2010 3:54:06 PM PDT by screaminsunshine (m)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

We’re going to need a President who does a Reagan... or a super-Reagan... and breaks the public service unions via a sustained legislative and publicity offensive.

I think the public sector unions are even more insidious than the large private sector ones. Unionization can wreck the private sector, but the jobs go, too, and ultimately some compromise is reached. We haven’t seen that in the public sector, where the Federal jobs are completely secure, and the President makes every effort to transfer funds to preserve the state unionized state employees’ jobs and pensions.


5 posted on 09/07/2010 4:03:36 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

No secret ballots would open the door to violence and unprecedented terrorizing of workers. None of this would be in anybodies interest including the unions. The only thing that I can think is that the Dems and union officials are just too stupid to see what the results of this awful legislation would be.


6 posted on 09/07/2010 4:14:09 PM PDT by purplelobster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: pabianice

The unions are the brown shirts of the fascist government.


8 posted on 09/07/2010 4:32:43 PM PDT by spodefly (This is my tag line. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: purplelobster
All they see are more Union members and more Union dollars coming their way if Card Check passes. And more strong armed votes for Democrats. They aren't too bright and those that are bright enough to see the future do not care about the violence. Disgusting.
9 posted on 09/07/2010 4:52:35 PM PDT by originalbuckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson