Stephen Cabot's Blog | Labor Relations

TAG | Unions

From the desk of Steve Cabot:

As we have expressed on other occasions, one of the most profoundly disturbing aspects of the Obama administration is its blatant contempt for the separation of powers mandated by the Constitution. In large ways and small, the executive branch has acted with utter disregard for long-established custom and the rule of law, showing no restraint in imposing its will in the relentless pursuit of its power-consolidating agenda.

A favorite tactic has become the use of arbitrary rule-making in areas clearly reserved for Congress. A major malefactor in this regard is the NLRB, acting more as an arm of the Obama administration than an independent agency created to arbitrate labor disputes and ensure workplace fairness.

A glaring example was the recent issuance of a rule with several odious provisions:

  • The invasion of worker privacy through the forced turnover of personal contact information, including telephone, email and physical addresses.
  • The denial of an employee’s right to “opt out” of being besieged by union organizers prior to an election, even at home.
  • The authorization of “ambush elections,” forcing workers to decide on union representation within as few as 7 to 10 days, well short of the time necessary for management to present its case to workers.
  • In a separate action, the NLRB authorized union bosses to cherry-pick small pockets of support in an organization and create “micro” bargaining units, thereby gaining a foothold in places where a large majority of workers might oppose unionization.

Congress is now the process of pushing back against these arbitrary rules using a provision of the Congressional Review Act called a Resolution of Disapproval. If enacted, this joint resolution will reverse these onerous regulations and reestablish the rights of employers and their workers.

With passage assured in the Republican-controlled House, it remains for the Senate to follow suit. The measure – S.J. Res. 36 – already has 45 co-sponsors and needs only a simple majority to pass. You must act now by calling your senators and urging them to vote YES on S.J. Res. 36.

Update, April 24, 2012:
Senate Democrats, joined by Sen. Murkowski (R-AK) defeated S.J.Res. 36 today by a vote of 54 – 45, in essence approving the NLRB’s usurpation of power. Sen. Sanders (I-VT) abstained.

· · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Feb/12

11

ERA: RANK-AND-FILE REVOLT?

From the desk of Steve Cabot:

It has always suited union bosses to paint employers as privileged ogres getting rich off the backs of their workers. Envy and resentment are emotions easily stoked and manipulated, and Big Labor has been shameless in using “us/them” rhetoric to distract the rank-and-file from the real workplace abuses, namely their loss of individual rights.

Times are changing, however. Workers have begun to shake off their shackles and support measures restoring their liberty. One of the key pieces of legislation codifying these reforms is the Employee Rights Act (ERA), introduced in August 2011. The measure has been bottled up in committee by the Democrat majority in the Senate, but there appears to be a renewed groundswell of support for its passage, with at least 70% of union households now endorsing its key provisions. (See my September 2011 blog entry below for more specifics.)

While passage of an intact ERA is unlikely before this fall’s elections, supporters in Congress will attempt to attach individual elements to other legislation destined for a presidential signature. I’ll keep you posted on the latest developments as they unfold.

In other encouraging news, freedom of choice for employers and their workers got a big boost when Indiana became the 23rd right-to-work state, the first in the “rust belt” to do so. Unfortunately, the pushback against forced unionism has hit resistance elsewhere in union strongholds like Wisconsin, where the threat (and actuality) of recall elections has weakened the resolve of some reformers.

Whatever the political developments this year, however, we know the Obama administration will continue to push its anti-employer agenda – with or without constitutional authority. And should you find your organization needing assistance with any labor relations matters, I encourage you to call me directly on my cell phone (215-990-3423) or contact Georgetta McCabe, my administrative assistant, on her direct line: 800-655-2042.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

May/11

20

WORKERS TAKE UP THE ANTI-UNION BANNER

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

In Columbus, Mississippi, permanent replacement workers have taken up the anti-union banner: they want to decertify the union at Omnova Solutions, Inc., a maker of upholstery products.

A petition for decertification has been filed; and after a four-to-six week period awaiting approval of the petition by the NLRB, more than 100 workers could vote in a secret ballot election to make the company non-union, following a year-long strike that has had a negative effect on the company’s bottom line.

This is another example of American workers being fed up with unrealistic union demands, especially during a period of high unemployment when workers are desperate to earn a living, to pay their expenses, and put food on dinner tables. Only high-handed union officials seem unconcerned with the day-to-day problems of the unemployed. It’s time for all American workers to say no to unionization and yes to full employment.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

May/11

13

NLRB GOES AFTER ARIZONA

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

In a further attempt to promote card checks, the National Labor Relations Board has filed suit to void a voter-approved constitutional amendment in Arizona that allows the formation of unions only by secret ballot elections.

This is not only blow against democracy, for Arizonians voted to approve the way unions could be formed, but it is also evidence of the NLRB’s ongoing determination to promote Card Checks as a way of increasing union membership.

Arizona’s attorney general will fight the lawsuit, making a stand for democracy and the rights of workers and management to decide upon unionization based upon secret ballot elections.

That, however, has not curtailed the intentions of the NLRB, which now plans to sue South Dakota as well over its passage of a constitutional amendment similar to Arizona’s In addition, the NLRB may initiate legal action against South Carolina and Utah in the coming weeks or months. It is apparent that if organized labor cannot get congress to pass the Employee Free Choice Act (aka, Card Checks), then it will let the NLRB do its bidding, even if it involves abrogating the votes of citizens.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

The attorneys general of nine right-to-work states, where workers cannot be forced to join a union as a condition of employment, have issued a statement condemning a wrong-headed ruling by the National Labor Relations Board that prevents Boeing from building its Dreamliner 787 in South Carolina. The states are South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Virginia, Arizona, Oklahoma, Florida, Alabama, and Georgia. Alan Wilson, the Attorney General of South Carolina, wrote: “The only justification for the NLRB’s unprecedented retaliatory action is to aid union survival.” We could not agree more.

As we recently reported, Boeing chose to open a manufacturing facility in South Carolina because several strikes in Washington had not only significantly delayed the company’s production goals by many months, but had also cost the company tens of millions of dollars. South Carolina provides a more business friendly environment than does the state or Washington.

As a corporation operating in a free-market economy, Boeing has the right to operate a manufacturing facility wherever it wants, especially as it contributes to the welfare of its employees and to a profitable bottom line. It is an essential element of our capitalistic heritage. And we support the right of all corporations to do business wherever they want, not someplace chosen by the NLRB, catering to the demands of unions, such as the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, which has applauded the NLRB’s decision.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

Though Republican congressional representatives have expressed their displeasure at the overtly pro-union rules and regulations issued by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), they failed to cut the Board’s budget.
The vigorously negotiated budget deal that was recently agreed upon has exempted the NLRB from the budget cutter’s scalpel, thus leaving intact a major obstacle to the economic well-being of Corporate America. There had been vigorous lobbying to cut the Board’s budget, but union lobbyists may have outspent their opponents, leaving former union attorney Craig Becker to direct the NLRB’s actions in accordance with the wishes of organized labor.
The Wall Street Journal had reported earlier this year that the GOP intended to cut the Board’s annual budget by $50 million, which would have amounted to 1/5 of its overall budget.
Not only has the proposed budget cut not materialized, but the Board has actually experienced an increase in funding. The result, unfortunately, will be that that Board will be energized by the unfulfilled threats of its opponents and its increased budget; it will continue on its pro-union, anti-management war path. Its actions, no doubt, will prove pernicious to the economic growth of the country.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

Angela Greiling Keane reported on Bloomberg News that the U. S. Postal Service negotiated a 4 ½ year contract with the American Postal Workers, which has 202,000 members. She quotes Representative Darrell Issa, a California Republican, as stating: “We have deep concerns that some of the provisions of the contract may in fact be the wrong direction, to less flexibility, less ability to trim the workforce and less ability to in the future make the kinds of investments we need to make.”

The new contract will not stem the tide of enormous losses; and it will certainly not lead to a renaissance of profitability for the postal service, which has suffered losses for the last five quarters. Its labor costs are a whopping 80% of its total budget, while labor costs for UPS are 69% of its operating budget, and 43% for the operating budget of FedEx, which is staffed by a combination of employees and independent contractors.

Until the postal service can bring its labor costs in line with private sector employers such as UPS and FedEx, it will continue to run huge billion-dollar deficits. The sorry state of the U. S. Postal Service is just another example of how public-sector unions drive companies into the ground. The goals of the governors of Ohio and Wisconsin should become the goals of a fiscally responsible federal government.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Mar/11

11

REALITY SWEEPS ACROSS MIDDLE AMERICA

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

After years of being over taxed to pay the outrageous salaries, benefits, and pensions of public sector employees, four principled Republican governors decided to turn back the collective bargaining clock and make public-sector and even some private-sector unions responsible to all citizens.

It has taken considerable courage on the part of the governors of Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio, and Idaho to face down angry, vituperative mobs who have attempted to block legislative buildings and intimidate legislators. But, the governors stood firm, for they know that they have the vast majority of the citizens on their side. And those citizens expect their governors to balance state budgets and reign in extortionate unions without imposing ever more burdensome taxes.

In Wisconsin, collective bargaining by public sector workers would be restricted to salaries only, and legislation would require unions to permit members to vote annually about whether they want to remain unionized. In Indiana, proposed new legislation would prohibit unions from collecting union dues. In Ohio, collective bargaining and binding arbitration for public-sector workers would end. Legislation would also permit the hiring of replacement workers during strikes. In Idaho, collective bargaining by teachers would be limited to salaries and benefits. In addition, tenure would be phased out for teachers.

Altogether, governors in the Midwest have taken courageous stands, ones that should stiffen the spines of other governors across the country

· · · · · · · · · · · · ·

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

While the news media has been focusing on public sector unions in Wisconsin and Ohio, the Obama administration has quietly encouraged the unionization of 45,000 airport screeners.
The Transportation Security Administrator, John Pistole, a pro-union advocate, has been lauded by federal unions, who have wanted to unionize airport screeners for many years.
This is an extraordinary development in light of the anti-public-union sentiment that has swept the county in the last few months.
As the Obama Administration and Democratic legislators gear up for the 2012 elections, they will surely enlist the vast armies of unionized workers to deliver their election victories. As we get closer and closer to 2012, we can expect to see ever-increasing pro-union directives emanating from the White House.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Feb/11

25

PUBLIC SECTOR UNIONS WANT HIGHER TAXES

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

Throughout the country, public sector unions are campaigning for higher taxes as a means to prevent government cutbacks. From Oregon to New York and states in between, unions are waging ferocious fights to prevent states from balancing budgets by cutting expenses.

Unions, such as SEIU and AFSCME, are spending extraordinary sums to promote higher taxes as a means to prevent cutbacks that they feel will result in fewer members, lower amounts from union dues, and less money to spend on political campaigns.

In Oregon, the Oregon Education Association and the SEIU spent millions of dollars to pass ballot initiatives that ultimately raised business and income taxes by approximately $727 million.

In Arizona, unions were behind an effort that increased sales taxes from 5.6% to 6.6%, thus helping to raise one billion dollars.

In New York, the United Teachers union spent $750,000 to prevent the state from capping some of the highest real estate taxes in the nation. In fact, real estate taxes in New York State are so high that many middle class families and small businesses have left the state.

And so it goes from state to state, but it doesn’t stop there. It exists nationally as well. Unions give more money than do any other entities to the national Democratic party. And the purpose of their giving is no different from their state-by-state donations: generous donations to congressional, senatorial, and presidential campaigns require a payback, And that payback is legislation that will increase wages and benefits for public sector workers by raising taxes. Public sector unions benefit; public sector workers benefit. And the American people, their states and corporations foot the bill. The American people, who are not members of public sector unions, are the victims of a vicious cycle of union-government-union actions that are increasingly injurious to the health of the American economy.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Older posts >>

Disclaimer: Although this blog may be helpful in informing clients and others who have an interest in labor relations issues, it is not intended to be legal advice. The thoughts offered in this space refer to complex matters, and the significance of them – i.e. how they might apply (or not) to any particular individual or organization – may vary considerably. Readers should not rely on the information or opinions expressed in this blog as a substitute for competent legal or consultative advice specific to their circumstances.