From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

In an effort to further aid organized labor, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is considering permitting unions to organize small numbers of workers in any company. Unions may choose to organize as few as five to ten employees, while not bothering with dozens or even hundreds of others. Obviously, it will be far easier for unions to organize five to ten workers rather than an entire workforce. The result will be the formation of “micro unions.”
The creation of “micro unions” would permit unions to focus on workers who have specific job descriptions, ones that may be easier to organize than other types of workers.
If a union wanted to organize workers at department stores, for example, it could choose to organize stock workers, shipping clerks, and sales clerks without attempting to organize more senior level employees. Similarly, in hotels, unions could attempt to organize maids, busboys, waiters, and bell hops, while not bothering with desk clerks and various levels of managers. Such efforts, if successful, would not only give unions a foothold into various businesses, but it would give them negotiating leverage, for a “micro union” could call for a strike, thus making it impossible for the non-union employees to operate a company. Like an army winning one small battle after another, such a step-by-step approach would provide unions with an eventual opportunity to win the battle against management and take over the entire workforce.
It is essential that management learn the appropriate survival strategies so that it can defeat incremental efforts at unionization. It will be one of the vital topics at my upcoming labor relations seminars.

"micro unions" · battles · cabot institute · invasion · Labor Relations · micro union · micro unons · National Labor Relations Board · nlrb · organized labor · organizers · stephen cabot · Steve Cabot · strikes · unionization · Unions · war

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has threatened to sue four states for ensuring that workers can enjoy a basic democratic right to cast secret ballots when it come s to the possibility of unionization. The four states, South Dakota, South Carolina, Arizona, and Utah, have mandated the use of secret ballots in union elections.

The NLRB has made the Alice-in-Wonderland assertion that secret ballots violate federal law. Though Congress has refused to pass the Employee Free Choice Act that would have permitted unions to coerce workers into signing “card checks” to ensure union representation, the NLRB has repeatedly looked for opportunities to present unions with opportunities to impose the use of “card checks” on workers, who may not want to join a union.

Indeed, the most effective tactic that workers have against forced unionization is the secret ballot. No union organizer gets to coerce, embarrass, or intimidate a worker to join a union when the workers’ preferences are made oblique by casting secret, anonymous ballots.

We back the efforts of Minnesota Republican Representative John Kline to amend the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) with the passage of the Secret Ballot Protection Act. While the Republican dominated House of Representatives very well may pass the amendment, the Democrats in the Senate will not pass it. Corporate America, therefore, will have to wait until the election of 2012 to be delivered from the high-handed, pro-union actions of the NLRB. Meanwhile, it is essential that corporations put in place survival strategies that prevent labor relations problems before they arise.

2012 · Arizona · cabot institute · card check · card checks · Democrats · EFCA · election · elections · Employee Free Choice Act · House of Representaives · John Kline · Labor Relations · mandate · mandates · National Labor Relatiions Board · national labor relations act · nlra · nlrb · organized labor · organizers · Republicans · Senate · Senators · South Carolina · South Dakota · stephen cabot · Steve Cabot · uniionization · Unions · Utah

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

Recently, the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) decided to permit airport security screeners to vote for union representation. And not only can they vote for such representation, but they have a choice of voting for one of two powerful unions, each of which is waging expensive campaigns to win the right to represent the screeners. The two unions are the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU).
In its high priced battle to win the right to represent the security personnel, AFGE has placed a 25-foot advertisement at Boston’s Logan International Airport, which features an endorsement from AFL-CIO. AFGE is a member of the AFL-CIO, while NTEU is an independent union and so does not merit AFL-CIO support.
There are currently 50,000 transportation security personnel who will be permitted to vote. That will represent the largest single election by federal workers.
And all of this comes at a time when the vast number of Americans and their congressional representatives want to control the ever-increasing compensation of federal employees which averages twice the salaries paid to equivalent private sector employees.
Regardless of which union wins, the American people will lose, for unionized security personnel will have significant leverage over the economy. If, for example, its members decide to stage a walkout during contract negotiations, they could close down every airport in the United States. The economy would be put on hold, and our current recession would only worsen. One need only recall the effort by the air traffic controls to close down the country’s airports in the 1980s. President Reagan fired the strikers and avoided an economic meltdown. One can hardly expect such decisive action from President Obama who has appointed pro-union advocates to the NLRB.

air traffic controllers · airport security personell · airports · american federation of government employees · authority · boston · federal employees · federal labor relations · federal workers · FLRA · Labor Relations · logan airport · national treasury employees union · nlrb · nteu · organizers · President Obama · president reagan · stephen cabot · Steve Cabot · unionization · Unions

From the desk of Stephen Cabot

The presidency of Barack Obama has produced a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that is decidedly pro-union and anti-business. The president’s appointees to the Board have made their ideological positions well known, and those positions are the reverse of what existed under President George W. Bush. The most vociferous advocate for organized labor on the Board is Craig Becker, but there are others who are equally committed to giving every possible benefit to unions. And together, they are a powerful majority who share the same goals: to increase union membership.
Corporate America can now expect a powerful barrage of NLRB actions that will enhance the ability of unions to win battles and enlist workers in the army of organized labor. The NLRB will make it increasingly difficult for companies to educate workers against the potential injuries associated with unionization; companies will find it increasingly difficult to decertify unions; they will have to accept electronic voting instead of secret paper ballot voting. And more: unions have now been granted the right to hoist and display anti-business banners that can intimidate management not only at organizing targets, but also at companies that do business with the those being targeted by organizers. And it’s not just banners: businesses can be harassed by noisy demonstrators carrying loudspeakers, blowing horns and whistles, and shouting at passersby. And most insidiously, the Board is soon expected to permit workers to use their employers’ computers to send pro-union e-mails to their colleagues. In effect, companies will no longer have the right to restrict employee use of company-owned computers. It will be a computer virus that no spyware will be able to prevent.

The NLRB is obviously creating a Brave New World for union organizers. And Corporate America will be the unfortunate victim. It is, therefore, essential that management immediately put in place proactive labor relations survival strategies. Not to do so will prove self-destructive. One should not wait for the enemy to attack; one should have defense mechanisms in place to prevent those attacks from ever succeeding. Aggressive organizers are now drawing up plans to rouse one’s workers to bite the hands that feed them!

business · businesses · cabot institute · companies · company · corporate america · employees · Labor Relations · management · National Labor Relations Board · nlrb · organized labor · organizers · stephen cabot · Steve Cabot · union organizers · Unions · workers

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

The fight to pass card check legislation has stalled in congress, much to the anger and dismay of organized labor. It, therefore, turned its efforts to individual states, such as Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Oregon, which have passed card check legislation, permitting union organizers to bypass secret ballot elections and increase union membership. More than ten states have now passed legislation permitting the use of card checks. The use of card checks invites union intimidation, harassment, and coercion, not just to employees, but also to their families.

In response to the actions taken by those ten states, four other states have proposed legislation to maintain secret ballot elections. The four states are Arizona, South Carolina, Utah, and South Dakota. To ensure that workers cannot be coerced by union organizers into signing cards declaring they want to be represented by unions, North Dakota, for example, is proposing an amendment to its state constitution that in union elections “the fundamental right of the individual to vote by secret ballot election be protected.”

Unions and their pro-union political allies fail to admit that unionization has been a disaster for their states. Over the last ten years, pro-union governors have witnessed their states’ employment decrease by 2.8%. Right-to-work states, however, have enjoyed a 3.7% increase in employment over the same period!

card check · card checks · congress · democratic · Democrats · governors · labor legislation · law · legislation · organized labor · organizers · pro-union · states · states rights · stephen cabot · Steve Cabot · Unions

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

The acting General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has issued a new rule to be implemented by the NLRB’s regional offices. It establishes procedures regarding employees who have been fired for aiding in union organizing campaigns.
The new rule orders regional offices to file injunctions in federal courts that require employers to maintain the employment of union organizers who have committed unfair labor practices. The employers must do so until the cases are formally resolved, which could occur after organizing campaigns have proven successful. Once that has happened, it is highly unlikely that unions would permit such organizers to be terminated.
The new rule is obviously intended to protect union organizers from the consequence of their aggressive tactics. Yet, the ruling does nothing to protect anti-union employees who may be victims of untoward behavior by aggressive organizers.
Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, stated that “The NLRB Acting General Counsel’s one-sided dictate creates a double standard against employees who want nothing to do with a union.”
This is one more effort by the Obama administration’s pro-union officials to find ways to implement the discredited, anti-corporate legislation known as “card check.”

cabot institute · card check · counsel · genral · injunctions · Labor Relations · legal defense foundation · mix · National Labor Relations Board · nlrb · organizers · Right to Work · stephen cabot · Steve Cabot · Unions · work

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

According to an article on the website of the U. S. Chamber of Commerce (www.chamberpost.com), the Chamber noted that the implementation of an Executive Order will gag contractors when doing business with the federal government. They will be restricted from exercising their rights of free speech when it comes to union organizing efforts.

President Obama’s Executive Order will prohibit contractors from using funds to persuade employees “to exercise or not to exercise, or concerning the manner of exercising, the right to organize and bargain collectively through representatives of the employees’ own choosing.”
In other words, federal contractors will be bound by an Executive Order to gag themselves financially so that they cannot influence the outcome of a union organizing attempt of their employees. Not only will employees be hurt by not being permitted to hear both management and union’s sides of an argument, but so will employers who will be left helpless when confronting organizing efforts. In addition, a basic right, guaranteed by the U. S. Constitution, will be foully and flagrantly flouted as will the basic concepts of debate ensured in the National Labor Relations Act.
This is an outrageous attack on democratic institutions and traditions, one that will
damage our economy and make a mockery of free speech.

cabot institute · Chamber of Commerce · Constitution · contractors · democratic · emplooyees · employers · executive order · federal contractors · free speech · Labor Relations · national labor relations act · organizers · President Obama · stephen cabot · Unions

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

Without having to get congressional approval, President Obama is determined to give union leaders everything they want. It is apparent that unions will soon have many new opportunities to organize formerly unaffiliated workers, and governmental agencies will provide all possible assistance.

To begin, the National Mediation Board (NMB) has made a major alteration to its 75-year old rules so that workers at railroads and airlines can easily be organized. For three-quarters of a century, workers who did not vote in organizing elections had their non-votes counted as negative votes; now, under a new ruling, if the majority of votes are pro-union, the union will have won the right to represent workers. This would not have happened if President Obama had not appointed a pro-union advocate to the NMB

Next, all companies that do business with the federal government will have to be union friendly companies. That means that they have to pay union wages, and that rule applies to all federal agencies. If a company received stimulus funds for construction projects, that company must pay standard union wages to its workers. Such a ruling will, no doubt, drive up governmental costs, thus adding to an already burgeoning deficit.

Perhaps the most dangerous element of the new government paradigm is the recent appointment of Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board. Mr. Becker had been the legal counsel to the highly aggressive Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Since he claims that the NLRB can re-write rules, one can expect him to find a way to make “card checks” legal, thus obviating the requirement for secret ballot elections.

The president of the AFL-CIO, Richard Trumka, is optimistic that “card checks” will eventually become law, perhaps by attaching it to an innocuous piece of legislation, or having his ideological comrade in arms, Craig Becker, change the rules.

President Obama campaigned on “change we can believe in.” The changes he is making are ones that reality forces us to believe, but they are changes that will do significant damage to Corporate America and to the American economy.

afl-cio · cabot institute · congress · corporate america · craig becker · Labor Relations · National Labor Relations Board · national mediation board · nlrb · nmb · organizers · organizing · President Obama · richard trumka · Service Employees International Union · seui · stephen cabot · unionization · Unions

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

United Parcel Service is waging a full-strength campaign to get the U S Congress to make sure that FedEx will be subject to the same onerous union rules as itself.
According to an article in The Wall Street Journal, “House Transportation Chairman James Oberstar (D. Big Labor) last year slipped 230 words into a spending bill that would make it easier for the Teamsters to unionize FedEx. This ambush was included at the urging of UPS, which has been saddled with the Teamsters for decades and wants FedEx to feel its pain.”
While UPS operates under the rules of the National Labor Relations Act, which makes the company vulnerable to strikes (e.g. a 15 day strike in1997), FedEx operates under the rules of the Railway Labor Act, which discourages strikes so that there will not be any “interruptions to commerce”

FedEx delivers most of its time-sensitive packages via air, and its customers choose its services because they expected rapid uninterrupted deliveries. UPS, by other means, delivers most of its packages by truck and customers understand that delivery may take a few days.

Having failed to have itself re-classified under the Railway Labor Act, UPS would now like to have FedEx made subject to the National Labor Relations Act, which would open the doors to Teamster organizers. And that’s a potentially large dues paying number of workers for the Union: there are 125,000 FedEx workers.

Imagine, for a moment, if FedEx were to be unionized and then experience slow downs or walk outs by Teamster-organized workers. Its business model would be utterly destroyed. And so UPS is intent on lobbying Congress to make FedEx subject to National Railway Act, thus opening the door to union organizers.

Congress should ignore the lobbying of UPS and adhere to the principles of a free market economy, and UPS should work to decertify its union rather than impose restrictions on its competition. The American economy works best when companies are free to engage in unhindered competition. The answer is not to shackle one’s competition; rather, the answer is to throw off one’s own shackles and engage in a free, open, and vibrant economy.

cabot institute · congress · fedex · Labor Relations · organizers · stephen cabot · teamsters · unionization · Unions · ups