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

Skip to comments.

NLRB Seeks to Overturn Voter-Approved Secret Ballot Laws in Arizona, South Dakota
CNSNews ^ | April 28, 2011 | Fred Lucas

Posted on 04/28/2011 9:10:43 AM PDT by jazusamo

(CNSNews.com) – The National Labor Relations Board is seeking an unprecedented expansion of powers in a lawsuit to overturn voter-approved constitutional amendments in at least two states guaranteeing the secret ballot for union elections, South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley said.

The NRLB contends it is perfectly within the agency’s jurisdiction to bring a “preemptive” lawsuit against the states.

The agency announced it would move forward with litigation against the states of South Dakota and Arizona to strike the laws from the states that voters approved last November to guarantee employees have the right to vote via secret ballot on whether to form unions at their workplace. The states of South Carolina and Utah passed similar amendments to their constitutions.

“Many lawyers will tell you it [the secret ballot] is an implied right within their state constitutions,” Jackley told CNSNews.com.

“But this made it clear this is going to be an explicit right, a fundamental right, guaranteeing the right to the secret ballot for a variety of things: For elected officials such as myself, for the referendum process or ballot initiatives, and for employment representatives. That certainly has been the touchiest point with the AFL-CIO that had filed that initial state court lawsuit,” Jackley added.

The AFL-CIO in South Dakota sought to prevent the measure from going to the ballot after it was passed by the legislature. The South Dakota Supreme Court ruled the measure could go to voters.

The ballot measure passed in the four states by wide margins in November. In Arizona, 61 percent of voters approved the measure. In South Carolina, 86 percent of the voters backed the secret ballot amendment. In South Dakota, 79 percent of the voters approved the amendment, and in Utah the initiative was approved by 60 percent of voters.

NLRB acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon told the four attorney generals in an April 22 letter, “I have directed my staff to initiate lawsuits in federal court seeking to invalidate Arizona Constitutional Article 2 S. 37 and South Dakota Constitutional Article 6 S.28 as preempted by operation of the NLRA [National Labor Relations Act] (29 U.S.C. 151) and the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution (U.S. Const. Art. VI., cl. 2). I expect that they will do so shortly.”

Solomon said it would not be efficient to take action against all four states at this time, leaving the door open for future suits against South Carolina and Utah.

“We adhere to our position that all four state constitutional provisions are preempted and reserve the right to initiate a suit against the other two states at the appropriate time,” Solomon continued.

The effort at the state level was in response to the proposed Employee Free Choice Act, a bill backed by congressional Democrats and President Barack Obama that never passed. This bill would have allowed secret-ballot elections in union organizing to be replaced with a system in which union organizers ask workers to sign a card, and once a majority signs, the union is recognized.

Opponents of the act say it opens the door for union organizers to pressure and intimidate employees. Advocates for the bill say that management intimidates workers from voting in the secret ballot elections, and attempt to block the elections from even taking place – thus the card check system is necessary.

Under the 1935 National Labor Relations Act, private-sector employees have two ways to choose a union, according to an NRLB news release. Employees may vote in a secret-ballot election conducted by the NLRB, or they may persuade an employer to voluntarily recognize a union after showing majority support for one. The board contends the amendments violate the second provision.

While he will be advocating for his state’s right to implement constitutional amendment, Jackley will also challenge the NLRB’s authority to even bring the lawsuit.

“If you look at historic case law dealing with the National Labor Relations Board it typically deals with labor disputes involving an employee and a business, and it doesn’t involve a federal appointed board trying to undo the democratic process of a state’s voters to challenge a state’s constitution,” Jackley said. “I understand that just because there isn’t a case that deals with that doesn’t mean they can’t do it, but this is an unprecedented expansion of this board’s powers and authority.”

The NRLB right to take such action has been upheld in court, said Nancy Cleeland, NRLB director of public affairs.

“This action is far from unprecedented,” Cleeland told CNSNews.com in a statement. “The board’s authority to initiate preemption lawsuits was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in a 1971 case called NLRB v. Nash-Finch Co. Since that time the Board has initiated or participated in a number of preemption actions against states, which are detailed in a fact sheet on our website. Such preemption lawsuits give effect to the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which expressly applies to state statutes and state constitutional provisions.”

The action by the NLRB is simply political, as Obama and the Democrats could not push card check through the legislative process, said Katie Gage, executive director of the Workforce Fairness Institute, an advocacy group opposed to card check laws.

“The Obama administration was not able to deliver, so it is using its National Labor Relations Board and any other group of unelected bureaucrats it can in time to deliver labor for the president’s reelection campaign,” Gage told CNSNews.com. “They look at it as their mission to partner with big labor unions to force people into labor unions. Workers rights to vote on the secret ballot are something that affects people’s everyday lives.”



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; US: Arizona; US: South Carolina; US: South Dakota; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: aflcio; arizona; cardcheck; lawsuit; nlrb; obama; southdakota; unions; unionthugs
Are there any FReepers working in law that would have insight as to why the NLRB chooses to only sue two states instead of the four at this time?

Solomon's reason of it not being efficient doesn't seem logical, could there possibly be something about SC and UT that would make for a more difficult case for NLRB?

1 posted on 04/28/2011 9:10:50 AM PDT by jazusamo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

We don’t have an Administration, we have a Junta.


2 posted on 04/28/2011 9:11:57 AM PDT by AU72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AU72

Agreed. Obama and his appointed thugs will try any end run around Congress possible to gain power for the thug in the White House.


3 posted on 04/28/2011 9:14:41 AM PDT by jazusamo (His [Obama's] political base---the young, the left and the thoughtless: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Please bump the Freepathon or click above and donate or become a monthly donor!

4 posted on 04/28/2011 9:15:27 AM PDT by jazusamo (His [Obama's] political base---the young, the left and the thoughtless: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Are there any FReepers working in law that would have insight as to why the NLRB chooses to only sue two states instead of the four at this time?

So that if they lose, they can figure out a way to improve their approach for the other two states?

5 posted on 04/28/2011 9:22:29 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 ("It is only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything" -- Fight Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Whatever happens this will wind up in the USSC and there Obama and his union thugs will lose.

I think this is a wonderful issue for the election as it highlights the extreme connection between the unions and the Left in the country. Since the majority of Americans now see the Unions as greedy and are FOR reductions in tax payer benefits for them, the issue will be a winner for the Republicans.


6 posted on 04/28/2011 9:25:58 AM PDT by 101voodoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]



You Know You Love Free Republic

Click the Pic

Give whatever you can
Or sign up to donate monthly
and a sponsoring FReeper will contribute $10

Lazamataz is fading away!

7 posted on 04/28/2011 9:27:45 AM PDT by TheOldLady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

Thanks. That does seem like a possibility. Maybe they figure if they lost to all four states it would slam the door on them for future suits.


8 posted on 04/28/2011 9:29:04 AM PDT by jazusamo (His [Obama's] political base---the young, the left and the thoughtless: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Obama’s NRLB is treasonous. How DARE them commies seek to thwart the states. The damnable NRLB is not even Constitutional, anyway.


9 posted on 04/28/2011 9:30:44 AM PDT by backwoods-engineer (Any politician who holds that the state accords rights is an oathbreaker and an "enemy... domestic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 101voodoo

Good points and I agree that it could go to SCOTUS. With the present court I believe it’s pretty certain the NLRB will be shot down.


10 posted on 04/28/2011 9:33:21 AM PDT by jazusamo (His [Obama's] political base---the young, the left and the thoughtless: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

“Employees may vote in a secret-ballot election conducted by the NLRB, or they may persuade an employer to voluntarily recognize a union after showing majority support for one. The board contends the amendments violate the second provision.”

This sounds screwy to me. Hold the secret-ballot vote, and if the majority wants a union, so be it. Making people sign a card is pure union thuggery, and intimidation! And I’ve been the victim of union thuggery! I was too good a worker. producing too many parts per day.


11 posted on 04/28/2011 9:34:43 AM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Are there any FReepers working in law that would have insight as to why the NLRB chooses to only sue two states instead of the four at this time?

Because it gives the NLRB a second bite at the apple if the first lawsuit doesn't go their way.

12 posted on 04/28/2011 9:41:06 AM PDT by Maceman (Obama -- he's as American as nasi goreng)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maceman

Never forget - THE ENEMY IS WITHIN


13 posted on 04/28/2011 9:43:16 AM PDT by Digger ((If RINO is your selection, then failure is your election))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Bye-bye Free Republic...hello, Police State.


14 posted on 04/28/2011 9:43:49 AM PDT by bimboeruption (Clinging to my Bible and my HK.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maceman

Thanks, I thought that a possibilty too.


15 posted on 04/28/2011 9:44:43 AM PDT by jazusamo (His [Obama's] political base---the young, the left and the thoughtless: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
The board contends the amendments violate the second provision.

That is a pretty weak foundation. I predict the NLRB gets slapped down.

16 posted on 04/28/2011 9:45:39 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (What is so remarkable about the LFBC is ... that it is unremarkable. Then why ...?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Death to unions.


17 posted on 04/28/2011 9:45:57 AM PDT by meyer (We will not sit down and shut up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded
I would seem to be weak to me also but with these thugs and a federal judge sympathetic to leftism it's still scary.
18 posted on 04/28/2011 9:54:39 AM PDT by jazusamo (His [Obama's] political base---the young, the left and the thoughtless: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra
Card-check is like Democrat recounts -- the process continues until the union wins.

Those who refuse to sign are known to the union, and subject to harassment. Those who sign are unknown to management until the union gets a majority. So the union just keeps going until they get enough.

19 posted on 04/28/2011 9:58:40 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 ("It is only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything" -- Fight Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All

b


20 posted on 04/28/2011 10:13:54 AM PDT by Maverick68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Obama will continue to abuse and collect power until he is challenged. A tyrant, not a President.

His ministers reward supporters and punish enemies like an oriental despot.

21 posted on 04/28/2011 10:16:14 AM PDT by Jacquerie (We are not governed. We are ruled. FUBO.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
The action by the NLRB is simply political, as Obama and the Democrats could not push card check through the legislative process, said Katie Gage, executive director of the Workforce Fairness Institute, an advocacy group opposed to card check laws. ...“The Obama administration was not able to deliver, so it is using its National Labor Relations Board and any other group of unelected bureaucrats it can in time to deliver labor for the president’s reelection campaign,” Gage told CNSNews.com.
The Marxists at the NLRB are all on dope. They're trying to do an end run around Congress
  1. The 'Supremacy Clause', (Article VI, clause 2) isn't pertinent nor relevant in this instance.
  2. Neither is SCOTUS' decision in NLRB v. Nash-Finch Co.
So like Katie Gage says, this is purely Political, a payback attempt to the Unions for not getting Card Check rammed through. And the day that a bunch of unelected bureaucrats in some darkened 3rd subbasement in a building in DC start making 'their rules' - supersede the laws - is the day, 'I Go Rambo'!

Lock 'n Load.
All's ready on the firing line.

22 posted on 04/28/2011 12:34:34 PM PDT by Condor51 (The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits [A.Einstein])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Condor51
They're trying to do an end run around Congress

That's exactly what they're trying at the behest of Zer0. I would also bet the NLRB will get help from Holder's DOJ on this lawsuit.

23 posted on 04/28/2011 12:48:52 PM PDT by jazusamo (His [Obama's] political base---the young, the left and the thoughtless: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

24 posted on 04/28/2011 3:57:57 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty - Honor - Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandRat

Thanks for posting, that says it all.


25 posted on 04/28/2011 4:05:19 PM PDT by jazusamo (His [Obama's] political base---the young, the left and the thoughtless: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

And now we see the hill the dems have chosen to die on: unionism. Because it’s the gravy train.


26 posted on 04/30/2011 12:07:12 PM PDT by TenthAmendmentChampion (Darwinism is to Genesis as Global Warming is to Revelations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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