TSA And The Looming Threat Of Forced Unionization

Katie Gage
December 1, 2010

In spite of having its forced unionization agenda rejected just a few, short weeks ago, the Obama Administration refuses to take no for an answer. It is continuing its push to unionize whatever industry it can, wherever it can, whenever it can get away with it. The most recent target is the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).

Despite bipartisan warnings from elected officials and industry experts, the White House appears more interested in rewarding union bosses than advancing the security of hardworking, everyday Americans. And the effort to “payback” Big Labor at the expense of travelers doesn’t stop with the TSA.

Just last week, Big Labor continued its efforts to unionize Delta Airlines, something they’ve been salivating over since its merger with unionized Northwest Airlines. However, Delta’s workers continue to vote against unionization, despite the union-friendly National Mediation Board’s (NMB) rule change upending almost a century of precedent regarding workplace elections in the airline and railroad industries. In spite of the pro-union boss, anti-worker policy passed by the NMB, the workers at Delta Airlines have voted against forming a union eight separate times.

Still unwilling to take “no” for an answer, labor bosses are now appealing to their friends at the NMB to force unionization on Delta’s workers, while at the same time trying to unionize the security personnel whose jobs have been in the headlines this holiday travel season.

Just recently, another Federal agency – namely the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) – decided that labor bosses can campaign to unionize TSA staffers.

Really? Does this make sense to anyone? A country with unionized airline workers could be detrimental to our security as well as our economy. With new TSA regulations being enforced, leading to large public debate over pat downs and full body scanners, the looming threat of TSA unionization only adds to the concerns Americans will have about the future of air travel.

The TSA must be able to respond quickly and decisively to any and all threats presented ensuring the safety of its cargo (i.e. us). Instead, unionizing this Federal agency will essentially give union bosses veto authority over our security. Any changes in operations will need to be approved by Big Labor, in the process, leaving American citizens exposed, assuming the changes in protocol are even sanctioned by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and/or National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU).

A unionized TSA could also mean that these agents would be funneling large amounts of dues to the political spending machine that is Big Labor. Having spent hundreds of millions of dollars to elect President Obama, advance his agenda and promote union-friendly Members of Congress, Big Labor is constantly looking for new ways to increase its dwindling numbers and replenish its empty coffers. By infiltrating a government division such as the TSA, Big Labor will be gaining even greater footing within the government, while also receiving dues from more of its employees.

So, not only are our tax dollars going to union bosses who in turn use them to elect their supporters and punish their opponents, but our safety is put at risk at the same time. These are the very same short-sighted, special-interest awards Americans rejected on November 2nd, yet in span of less than a month, the message seems lost upon the intended recipients.

With Big Labor’s number one priority – the job-killing Employee ‘Forced’ Choice Act (EFCA) – shelved, desperation has set in and a wild power grab has commenced. The last thing our nation’s security needs is to be entangled in the web of Big Labor’s self-serving, anti-democratic agenda.

The TSA is facing enough challenges without the added dangers of forced unionization. The Obama Administration can and should do better. The American people are watching.

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