July 3, 2017 
Ryan Williams 202-677-7060


Make The NLRB Less Great Again

July 3, 2017
Washington Examiner

“Stop the presses! President Trump has nominated a second new commissioner to the National Labor Relations Board!”

Okay, yes, we jest. In reality, most Americans have probably never heard of the panel. They haven’t heard of William Emanuel or Marvin Kaplan — Trump’s appointees to the panel. They aren’t aware that this will give the panel its first Republican majority since 2009, and they probably haven’t even heard the acronym NLRB, let alone have the foggiest idea what it stands for.

But during the Obama years, the NLRB suddenly took on an outsized importance in Washington. It issued scads of economically crucial rulings, upending centuries of legal precedent on a cumulative basis, and leaving a lot of messes that Trump’s appointees must now clean up. One of the clear lessons of the Obama era is that this obscure panel possesses — or at least aspires to — far more power than it really ought to have.

The NLRB’s ostensible purpose is to promote labor peace by resolving disputes between workers, employers and unions so that they don’t need to clog the federal court dockets. But during the Obama era, the NLRB morphed into a crusading mini-legislature seeking to slow or reverse the natural demise of labor unions. It propagated many dubious rulings that overturned decades of established precedent. Over the objections of its Republican minority, the panel even attempted to establish new rules on employers never previously found guilty of unfair employment practices.

Many recent NLRB actions had to be overturned by the courts later, and some must still be overturned.

It now falls to Trump’s appointees to restore fairness and balance to labor law after eight years of overt, lawless favoritism toward union bosses.

Because it is such an obscure panel, many of the Obama NLRB’s abuses went under the radar. For example, you probably wouldn’t even know that last June, Obama’s NLRB even issued a ruling overturning an 80-year old Supreme Court precedent on when and for what reasons employers may permanently replace a striking employee. The specific issues of the case aside, Americans are simply not living under the rule of law if the NLRB, a creature of Congress, can just abruptly overturn long-established precedents of the highest court in the land.

The labor panel made a lot more news with its 2015 decision upending the entire franchise model of American business. This was done in the hopes of letting unions capture monopoly bargaining rights and dues money on a mass scale, rather than having to do the work of winning over employees for each individual local employer who operates a local McDonalds or Ace Hardware franchise. It is the local employer, after all, who hires, fires, and pays employees, yet the NLRB wants to give union bosses access to the bigger companies.

Obama’s NLRB introduced “quickie elections,” along with a requirement that employers hand over, on demand, the phone numbers and other private information of their employees to union organizers on two days’ notice. And it’s not enough for employers just to give them what they have in their database — they now have to check with every supervisor to see which workers’ private information they have. The sole purpose of this requirement is to help unions win organizing drives more frequently.

Obama’s NLRB has ruled that workers have a right to use their employers’ email systems for organizing. It tried to create a new rule forcing employers to prominently advertise unionization, even if they don’t want to. This latter rule was struck down by the courts, because federal law simply doesn’t give the NLRB authority to issue it.

And of course, let’s not forget that, in his haste to establish a quorum and provide unions with as much help as he possibly could, former President Barack Obama made recess appointments to the panel which were later ruled unconstitutional by a unanimous Supreme Court decision.

These are just a few examples of the mischief this little panel created during the Obama years. We urge Congress once again to curtail this panel’s authority immediately, before another union-crusading president takes power and tries to replicate Obama’s mischief. And we also hope the Senate will quickly confirm the new appointees so that they can steer the NLRB in a direction that is both more constructive and truer to the purpose of its existence.

To access the editorial, click here.

The Workforce Fairness Institute is an organization committed to educating voters, employers, employees and citizens about issues affecting the workplace.  To learn more, please visit:

To schedule an interview with a Workforce Fairness Institute representative, please contact Ryan Williams at (202) 677-7060.


Featured Blog

AZ Daily Sun--Coconino Voices: PRO Act legislation would hurt local businesses

— 05.13.2021 —
By: Julie Pastrik Arizona businesses and workers have had an incredibly challenging year given the economic slowdown that followed in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. However, local businesses and industries across the state are resilient and on the road to a strong recovery that will mean more jobs for Arizona workers and increased economic development to strengthen our communities. That is, as long as Congress does not move forward with potentially devastating legislation that would hurt local employers and employees alike while impeding our state’s economic recovery. Unfortunately, some members of Congress seem determined to do just that by pushing through the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act. As harmless as the name may sound, the PRO Act would have serious repercussions for local businesses, particularly smaller ones, while undermining long-standing rights for employees and threatening the growing gig economy that has helped provide much-needed income for so many during this time. Arizona is fortunate to have leaders like Senators Mark Kelly and Kyrsten Sinema, who have both refrained from joining the vast majority of their Democratic colleagues in cosponsoring the PRO Act. In a slap in the face to Arizona workers, the PRO Act removes one of the most fundamental rights a worker has when it comes to voting in elections to determine whether to unionize: the secret ballot. Instead, workers could be forced to sign union authorization cards in front of other employees, their employer, or union organizers. This bill would also destroy workers’ right to privacy by allowing unions access to personal information, including their home address and personal phone number. If that doesn’t open the door to union intimidation and harassment, I don’t know what does. As if that was not bad enough, the PRO Act would create major new challenges for Arizona businesses, making it harder for them to create jobs, expand in their communities, and even keep their doors open. It would redefine what it means to be a “joint employer” under national labor law, greatly complicating existing relationships between franchisors and franchisees as well as between business owners, contractors, subcontractors, and vendors and suppliers. At the same time, it would interfere with attorney-client confidentiality and make it much more difficult for small businesses to secure a legal advice on labor issues. Particularly harmful during these times, the PRO Act would apply a failed policy from California to national labor law by using the “ABC” test to determine whether a worker is an independent contractor or employee. This makes it much harder to qualify as an independent contractor, threatening the freedom and flexibility that tens of thousands of Arizonans find in independent contracting and gig economy work. Ultimately, the PRO Act is bad public policy that only works for union leaders to inflate their falling ranks while threatening workers’ rights, undermining small businesses, and jeopardizing a growing part of our economy. This is not a good solution for Arizona, and Senators Sinema and Kelly should stay firm and not cosponsor this misguided legislation.
Read More