WFI Responds To Obama Labor Board’s Ambush Elections

Federal Agency Issues Notice Of Proposed Rulemaking

Washington, D.C. – The Workforce Fairness Institute (WFI) today issued the following statement in response to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking in relation to “quickie” or “ambush” elections:

“President Obama’s National Labor Relations Board seeks immediate workplace elections to deprive employees the opportunity to hear all views related to unionization, while also denying employers the chance to express their point of view to workers.  The only story the government and labor bosses want employees to hear is the union story.  Consequently, the union will be able to make pie-in-the-sky promises and mislead employees in order to get their vote,” said Fred Wszolek, spokesperson for the Workforce Fairness Institute (WFI).  “The proposed rule, like the former one, stacks the deck against employers by forcing a vote before all election issues have been resolved, such as the size and scope of the bargaining unit, and the eligibility to participate in the workplace vote.  This would put enormous pressure on business owners and give Big Labor bosses a considerable advantage in the process.  The Obama Board claims the new procedures are necessary due to delays, but the median time for all elections has remained steady and even earned praise from Board officials.  This latest action by the NLRB is payback – plain and simple – to the union bosses who bankrolled President Obama’s campaigns, and will do nothing to help the economy grow and create jobs.”

BACKGROUND:

The National Labor Relations Board announced today that it is issuing proposed amendments to its rules and regulations governing representation-case procedures.  In substance, the proposed amendments are identical to the representation procedure changes first proposed in June of 2011.  A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) will appear in the Federal Register tomorrow.  The proposals are intended to enable the Board to more effectively administer the National Labor Relations Act.  Specifically, the NPRM presents a number of changes to the Board’s representation case procedures aimed at modernizing processes, enhancing transparency and eliminating unnecessary litigation and delay.  Issuance of the proposed rule was approved by Board Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce and Members Kent Y. Hirozawa and Nancy Schiffer.  Board Members Philip A. Miscimarra and Harry I. Johnson III dissented.” (Public Affairs Office, “The National Labor Relations Board Proposes Amendments To Improve Representation Case Procedures,” National Labor Relations Board, 2/5/14)

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: https://www.workforcefairness.com.

To schedule an interview with a Workforce Fairness Institute representative, please contact Lauren Zelt 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