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

Skip to comments.

U.S. Plans to Sue 4 States Over Laws Requiring Secret Ballots for Unionizing
NYT ^ | 01/14/2011 | Steven Greenhouse

Posted on 01/14/2011 6:58:22 PM PST by BuckeyeTexan

The National Labor Relations Board announced on Friday that it planned to sue Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah in an effort to invalidate recently approved state constitutional amendments that prohibit private sector workers from choosing a union through a process known as card check.

The labor board asserts that the amendments conflict with federal laws and are pre-empted by those laws.

The state amendments were promoted by various conservative groups concerned that Congressional Democrats and President Obama would enact legislation allowing unions to insist on using card check, in which an employer recognizes a union as soon as a majority of workers sign pro-union cards. That method makes it possible for employees to unionize without elections. But Congressional Republicans blocked such legislation.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arizona; US: South Carolina; US: South Dakota; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: arizona; cardcheck; secretballot; southcarolina; southdakota; unions; utah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 next last
To: FlingWingFlyer
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us


It's time for conservatives to
give a big hug to Free Republic.
Just click to donate, now!


21 posted on 01/14/2011 7:29:42 PM PST by vox_freedom (America is being tested as never before in its history. May God help us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: vox_freedom

Ummm. I’m a monthly donor. I haven’t gotten around to asking somebody to put my name on the list.


22 posted on 01/14/2011 7:33:04 PM PST by FlingWingFlyer ("New laws are always a "good idea" until the first time you have to enforce them." - Unknown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

23 posted on 01/14/2011 7:38:14 PM PST by Hotlanta Mike (TeaNami)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Dear leader is starting to think he is Hugo Chavez. Go States, Go!


24 posted on 01/14/2011 7:54:36 PM PST by Avid Coug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sionnsar
And what part of the constitution permits this?

That's what I was wondering. Maybe they're gonna "deem" the card check bill passed like they did with health care.

25 posted on 01/14/2011 8:04:22 PM PST by Shethink13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
The labor board asserts that the amendments conflict with federal laws and are pre-empted by those laws.

When exactly did card check become federal law?

26 posted on 01/14/2011 8:05:03 PM PST by denydenydeny (Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views, beyond the comprehension of the weak-Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

If I was an Arizona state legislator, there would be a secession bill in the hopper on Monday.


27 posted on 01/14/2011 8:09:41 PM PST by nonliberal (Graduate: Curtis E. LeMay School of International Relations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hotlanta Mike

Yeah, unions made Detroit (and Gary, and East St. Louis, etc.) look post-apocalyptic. Yeah, that’s it. Let’s go with that.


28 posted on 01/14/2011 8:30:21 PM PST by triumphant values (Never criticize that to your right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone
"If anyone doesn’t think that we are in a war for the life of this Republic then they are either totally deaf dumb and blind or just off the last rocket from Mars."

You are 100% correct...and, time is running out fast.

29 posted on 01/14/2011 8:34:51 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

The Supreme Court will be tied up for years sorting out the mess this administration is making.


30 posted on 01/14/2011 8:40:16 PM PST by BAW (Obama: "If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Me too!


31 posted on 01/14/2011 9:34:43 PM PST by TenthAmendmentChampion (Darwinism is to Genesis as Global Warming is to Revelations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Bring it On!

This union BS will not stand.

Even in the Constitution it is mandated that Federal ballots be submitted in privacy!

The Founders knew of the pressures that could be bought by intimidation.

(Jane, sign this card or your red Corolla, in E12, will have spiked tires!)


32 posted on 01/14/2011 10:51:10 PM PST by Noob1999 (Loose Lips Sink Ships)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Noob1999

Not a bad idea. They should bring that crime car stuff to union GM parking lots. Bring a new Accord and record away.


33 posted on 01/14/2011 10:58:03 PM PST by eyedigress ((Old storm chaser from the west)?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Something doesn’t seem right here.

These (state) laws were put into place to preempt Card Check. But Card Check never became (Federal) law. Since Card Check is not (Federal) law, how can these (state) laws contradict it?


34 posted on 01/14/2011 11:07:50 PM PST by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter
These (state) laws were put into place to preempt Card Check. But Card Check never became (Federal) law. Since Card Check is not (Federal) law, how can these (state) laws contradict it?

I guess the Feds argument is that it [Card Check] would have pre-empted state law if it had been passed ... And, since the Feds want to pass it, they have deemed it passed ... And, consequently, it [although non-existant] pre-empts existing state law ...

How's that grab ya ???

35 posted on 01/14/2011 11:41:32 PM PST by Lmo56 (If ya wanna run with the big dawgs - ya gotta learn to piss in the tall grass ...</i><p>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

It’s moot till Congress legislates differently (or tries to).


36 posted on 01/15/2011 12:33:27 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America (per bible: am in the world but not of it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

What is up with the federal govt suing the states on matters? Is there lots of precedent for this or is it something inventing by the Obama White House??? I’ve never heard of it happening before?

Banana republic


37 posted on 01/15/2011 2:47:34 AM PST by kelly4c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Be prepared for wake up to flat tires if you don’t vote union.

Interesting times.


38 posted on 01/15/2011 3:54:40 AM PST by Weird Tolkienish Figure
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
What the states need to do in order to dilute the thuggery of the Unions, Marxists in WH and Congress, Socialists in the WH and Congress, anarchists in the WH and Congress is quite simple.
Even though there was to be an all out attack against existing state laws here in North Carolina before the November elections, we are a “Right to Work State”. The Unions can hold all the collective bargaining efforts they want, but BEING A UNION MEMBER IS NOT A REQUIRMENT FOR EMPLOYMENT and being harassed for not being a union member is grounds for civil suits (to the best of my knowledge).

So all these four (4) states need to do is establish themselves as Right to Work states and dilute the unions.

North Carolina DemocRATS my have wet dreams about unionizing this state but, at present, that is all they are, just dreams, despite the Norma Rae syndrome that exists in the large metropolitan areas. The hinterlands are staunchly anti-union.

39 posted on 01/15/2011 5:19:55 AM PST by cashless (Unlike Obama and his supporters, I'd rather be a TEA BAGGER than a TEA BAGGEE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nonliberal

I truly believe that secession by force was not the way to go...states should have sued to go. I would support such a suit were it to arise in Florida.

IMO, just as one cannot be held liable for the crimes of their parents, a state cannot be held to abide by an agreement to join a federal union (don’t confuse my argument with any call for a revolution or insurrection because it is not) as individuals in these states have a right to current self determination unbound by agreements of the long ago dead.


40 posted on 01/15/2011 6:02:40 AM PST by Mouton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 next last

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