Americans Oppose Burdensome Regulations Starting With Those Enacted By Obama’s Labor Board

Fred Wszolek
September 20, 2011
Townhall

For some time, we have been saying that Americans are concerned with the overly burdensome and stifling regulations coming from unelected bureaucrats in government agencies more concerned with rewarding special interests than facilitating job creation. This week, two separate polls revealed that voters believe government is getting in the way of business and that there is wide-spread opposition to the actions of the Obama Administration’s National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

A recent Tarrance Group poll shows the extent of the voter opposition with 74 percent saying they believe “businesses and consumers are over-regulated.”

Certainly many Americans have heard of the NLRB’s decisions that threaten a loss of jobs and business closures in an effort to payback Big Labor bosses who funnel hundreds of millions into Democrat political campaigns. Whether it’s the NLRB’s decision to require nearly all the nation’s private employers to post partisan notices of employees’ right to unionize, its proposed rule to close the election window and ambush employees and employers with a union vote, or to permit the formation of micro-units watering down the definition of a collective bargaining unit to give labor bosses a better chance to gain a foothold in the workplace, Americans are fed up with the job-killing rules this administration is adopting by regulatory fiat.

These anti-growth actions of government agencies include the National Mediation Board (NMB) that overturned nearly a century of precedent in order to force unionization on workers in the airline and railroad industries. It also includes the Department of Labor’s proposed rule expanding the public disclosure requirements for employers, law firms, consultants and trade associations that provide labor relations advice to employers during a union organizing drive. This rule, if implemented, will result in depriving employers of advice they need and in essence gag them from expressing their views in opposition to the formation of a union in their workplace.

But anti-regulatory sentiment is best reflected in response to the NLRB’s complaint against the Boeing Company for opening a new non-union facility in the right-to-work state of South Carolina. According to the Tarrance Group, “78 percent of voters side with Boeing in agreeing that a business should be able to open a facility in any state, and that the government should not be involved in the decision about where Boeing or any company locates new plants.”

The result of the Tarrance poll is fully supported by this week’s Rasmussen poll that demonstrates the depth of the opposition to Obama’s labor board with 59 percent of union members agreeing that Boeing should be able to operate its South Carolina plant.

It appears that President Obama is in tune, at least rhetorically, with the sentiment of the American people. He recently stated in his address to a joint session of Congress that “[w]e should have no more regulation than the health, safety, and security of the American people require.”

Yet when it comes time to stand up for workers and businesses, the president’s words are hollow and he is nowhere to be found. Instead, union bosses seem to be calling the shots. American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) President Richard Trumka even brags about speaking with someone from the White House every day, including weekends.

With our economy stalling and millions of workers unable to find employment, Americans want strong and pragmatic leadership. Yet the Obama Administration is unwilling to respond and restrain its left-wing regulators who are smothering job creators with onerous and burdensome new rules and regulations that inject uncertainty and anxiety into the marketplace instead of stability and confidence. As a result, few employers are hiring, purchasing new equipment or expanding their businesses. They are leery of the agenda being aggressively pursued in Washington and the effect it will have on their business.

If President Obama wants to turn our economy around, the polling data demonstrates a clear way. He should step out from behind the teleprompter and tell his labor agencies to cease and desist from punishing employers and immediately stop the regulatory assault that is strangling our economy.

Tell Congress: Stop the PRO Act

WFI is working to prevent passage of the so-called Protecting the Right to Organize Act (PRO Act)—a wholesale labor reform package that takes the current careful balance of labor rules and tips it greatly in the favor of labor bosses and forced collective bargaining.

The PRO Act robs workers of the right to a secret ballot to form a union, forces union contracts on workers without a vote of approval, and expose workers’ personal contact information to union bosses seeking to organize a workplace. And that’s just the start.

Help us speak out against this woefully misguided and blatantly anti-worker legislation. Review and send the message below to your members of Congress today.

Read More »

Not a member? Sign up and become one today.

Featured Blog

WFI Key Vote Letter: Opposition to PRO Act

— 02.10.2020 —
Dear Speaker Pelosi and Minority Leader McCarthy: On behalf of the Workforce Fairness Institute (WFI), I am writing to share our organization’s vehement opposition to H.R. 2474, the Protecting the Right to Organize Act (PRO Act). WFI has serious concerns with the broad, overreaching nature of this legislation and the many ways in which it would undermine worker freedom and privacy, while simultaneously threatening businesses and entire industries that keep America’s economy thriving. Please note that WFI will include votes on the PRO Act and its amendments on our Congressional Labor Scorecard, which scores and ranks legislators based on their activity associated with workplace issues. WFI was established to fight for American employees and employers as well as our entire economy. We believe in worker empowerment, the right of workers to be fully informed of the options available for worker-involvement in the workplace, and the right to freely choose whether to organize or not. No individual or group – government, a union or an employer – should be able to intimidate or restrict workers’ in exercising these rights. In an attempt to boost flailing union membership at the expense of workers’ rights, the PRO Act would upend decades of established U.S. labor law and institute myriad anti-employee and anti-employer policies that have already been soundly rejected—by Congress, various federal agencies, or the courts. Among its most blatant affronts to workers’ rights, the PRO Act would eliminate the right to a secret ballot when determining whether to unionize and enforce a “card check” system, exposing workers to the potential for harassment, intimidation, and coercion. The PRO Act would also enforce binding arbitration in union negotiations by a government- appointed bureaucrat; repeal and eliminate right-to-work laws in 27 states, force workers to fund union activities regardless of whether they support them; and threaten the ability of individuals to operate as independent contractors, eliminating traditional economic and employment opportunities and threatening the independence and flexibility of the emerging gig economy. On top of all that, the PRO Act would force all workers’ personal and home contact information to be provided to a union during organizing campaigns – in an electronic, searchable format no less, with no limit on what a union can do with that information. WFI believes in advancing sensible policies that protect and preserve the rights of both employees and employers, and we welcome the opportunity to work with legislators who also support these efforts. However, the PRO Act does not achieve these goals and would instead threaten the rights of both while jeopardizing our entire economy. WFI urges members of the House to strongly oppose the PRO Act. Sincerely, Heather Greenaway Executive Director Workforce Fairness Institute See the letter here.
Read More