NLRB: Big Labor’s Stalking Horse?

Kate Gage
November 19. 2010
Daily Caller

For nearly two years, talk concerning labor law reform has centered on the Employee ‘Forced’ Choice Act (EFCA). As the Congressional session progressed and the small business community organized, the likelihood of EFCA’s passage — or any legislation eliminating the secret ballot and mandating binding arbitration — diminished. And as EFCA’s chances of passage began to fade, Big Labor shifted its attention to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), an independent federal agency whose mission is to “prevent and remedy unfair labor practices committed by private sector employers and unions.”

Union bosses worked behind the scenes to get handpicked advocates nominated to the board to advance their agenda. When labor radical Craig Becker wasn’t able to secure sufficient bipartisan support in the Senate to be seated on the NLRB, organized labor simply got their “payback” from the White House in the form of a recess appointment.

And Big Labor has not been shy in expressing what they want in return for the hundreds of millions they have spent electing politicians.

The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations’ (AFL-CIO) Stewart Acuff wrote in The Huffington Post, “It [sic] we aren’t able to pass the Employee Free Choice Act, we will work with President Obama and Vice President Biden and their appointees to the National Labor Relations Board to change the rules governing forming a union through administrative action…”

Now, with the election results in and Big Labor’s candidates having lost at the ballot box, union bosses are all about “chang[ing] the rules.”

Recently, the NLRB has taken action to favor labor bosses over employees and employers. Obama’s appointees to the board are carrying Big Labor’s water, and our freedoms and jobs are at risk.

Cases that have been decided and closed for years are now being reopened by these new board members, who aim to change pro-worker and pro-small business decisions into pro-union boss ones.

For example, most recently, the board backed unions in their practice of holding protest signs at small businesses who use contract workers, claiming that the signs are not coercive.

In addition, the NLRB is now considering implementing electronic voting services for remote elections as opposed to worksite elections where physical ballots are both cast and counted, a move that would open elections to potential fraud and workers to intimidation.

And now there is discussion that this “independent federal agency” will shorten the amount of time for workplace elections even though most take place within a month. While Big Labor bosses could begin planning and organizing months ahead of an election being called, small business owners could be caught unaware and have only a few days to make their case to their own employees.

And the list goes on and on. Little by little, union bosses are looking to leverage the actions of government bureaucrats doing their bidding, which will result in more people forced into unions and more money injected into Big Labor’s coffers.

Labor bosses are launching a full-force assault on workers and small businesses, using unelected government workers to do the heavy lifting. Union heads are the only ones who stand to benefit from the dangerous proposals making their way through the NLRB.

When the Workforce Fairness Institute (WFI) began its efforts to educate Americans about Big Labor’s agenda, we wanted to ensure that voters knew exactly what was happening in the halls of Congress so that they would be informed when going to the ballot box. But now a new threat has emerged — government bureaucrats appointed by President Obama pose the new danger to workers’ rights in our country.

Agencies like the NLRB are looking to “change the rules” and enact decisions that shorten union election time periods, open workers up to coercion and give Big Labor the upper hand when it comes to workplace organizing.

The Workforce Fairness Institute and its allies are prepared to educate workers and small business owners about the changing landscape of labor policy and will activate our network of supporters to put the brakes on Big Labor’s attempts to force unionization on workers through edicts handed down by faceless bureaucrats.

Katie Gage is executive director of the Workforce Fairness Institute (WFI).

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