Posted on 08/29/2015 11:27:35 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has become a lightning rod for controversy under President Obama, with its aggressive actions fueling sustained warfare between business and labor.
From the labor board’s bitter fight with Boeing, to the creation of new union election rules, the NLRB has repeatedly moved to the forefront of political debate, drawing in Congress, the White House and even the Supreme Court.
The NLRB’s latest bombshell was dropped on Thursday, when the board determined the waste management agency Browning-Ferris should be considered a “joint employer” of temporary workers.
The decision expands the definition of what it means to be an employer in the United States, and could put companies on the hook for labor violations committed by business partners and contractors.
Business groups condemned the decision, portraying it as the latest example of the NLRB blatantly favoring unions during Obama’s tenure.
“I’m pretty much amazed when unions say the Obama administration hasn’t done very much for them,” Michael Lotito, an employment and labor attorney. “There’s perhaps no labor board that has done more for organized labor than this one has.”
Beth Milito, senior legal counsel at the National Federation of Independent Business, said the labor board has “really put the wind back in the sails of unions."
Labor unions say the actions taken by the NLRB — an independent agency — are long overdue, and have cheered the board every step of the way.
Here’s a look at five of the biggest controversies involving the NLRB during Obama’s presidency.
Boeing plant fight
The labor board plunged into a politically charged battle against the aerospace giant Boeing in April 2011.
The NLRB’s top lawyer at the time, Lafe Solomon, accused Boeing of retaliating against union workers for strikes by building a new airplane manufacturing plant in another state.
Boeing continued building planes at its original plant in Washington state, but sent additional work to a new $750 million state-of-the-art facility in South Carolina.
The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, which represents more than 30,000 Boeing workers in Washington state, argued to the NLRB that all production should have stayed where it was.
The NLRB ultimately dropped the case after the union struck a deal with Boeing for higher wages and more jobs — but only after a wave of denunciations from business groups and congressional Republicans.
“Any notion of objectivity these guys may have had went bye bye a long time ago,” said Joe Trauger, vice president of human resources at the National Association of Manufacturers.
“The Boeing complaint was a clear indication of exactly what direction the board was going to head,” Trauger said. “It was a turning point for a lot of folks in the business community to see exactly how radical the board was going to be.”
Union election rule
After the Boeing scuffle, the NLRB wasted little time in turning to an equally controversial union election policy.
The labor board in June 2011 moved to speed up the process by which employees can organize by bringing up an election rule that was years in the making.
Critics labeled it the “ambush election rule,” arguing it does not give companies enough time to prepare for union ballots. Labor unions said the rule was an important step toward preventing management from delaying union votes.
“Too often, lengthy and unnecessary litigation over minor issues bogs down the election process and prevents workers from getting the vote they want,” AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said in a statement when the rule was issued in December 2014. “We commend the NLRB’s efforts to streamline the process and reduce unnecessary delay."
The union election rule was overturned in federal court a year later — but the fight was far from over.
The NLRB retooled and reintroduced the rule in 2014. The second version of the rule has so far survived numerous legal challenges and repeal attempts from Congress.
Specialty healthcare
The NLRB paved the way for multiple “micro-unions" to organize within a single workplace with its Specialty Healthcare decision in August 2011.
Specialty Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center is a nursing home company in Mobile, Ala. It had refused to recognize a small group of certified nursing assistants who tried to organize a union because they didn’t represent all of the company’s employees.
The labor board’s decision allowed different departments within a single company to organize their own unions. It has since been applied at other companies, including Macy’s.
Workplace posters
The NLRB also pushed a rule that would have required employers to hang posters in the workplace reminding employees of their right to organize a union.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers and the National Federation of Independent Business challenged the rule in court as a violation of the First Amendment rights of employers.
A federal appeals court struck down the rule in May 2013, and the NLRB decided not to appeal to the Supreme Court, leaving the rule on ice.
Recess appointments
Perhaps the biggest controversy involving the NLRB came when Obama installed three members on the labor board in January 2012 on the grounds that Congress was in recess.
Republicans had been holding informal, pro forma sessions to prevent recess appointments the NLRB, as the positions otherwise require Senate confirmation.
Senate Republicans were outraged that President Obama bypassed them to shift the balance of power at the NLRB by appointing two more Democrats and a Republican.
The Supreme Court later found that President Obama’s recess appointments were unconstitutional because the Senate was not in recess at the time, as the White House had claimed.
The high court's ruling has forced the NLRB to reconsider hundreds of decisions it had issued with invalid board members.
".....Unions may not matter much in American workplaces anymore but unions represent the main political obstacle to just about every kind of reform: School choice. Entitlements. Pensions. Health care.
Even causes that wouldn’t seem union business prompt union opposition. Labor has been the chief obstacle to overhauling California’s notorious Environmental Quality Act—a reform supported by Democrats and environmentalists—because unions like using the law’s excessive paperwork burdens to threaten projects important to employers.
Big labor is behind a New Jersey state senator’s proposal last week for a trillion-dollar federal bailout of state and local government pensions—pensions that most federal taxpayers who would be paying for the bailout can only dream about.
Big labor is behind $15 minimum-wage proposals in major cities—a high-risk experiment for low-skilled workers, who may find themselves without jobs. But it will be a winner for organized labor. Not only will it raise costs for nonunion businesses. In Los Angeles,unions seek their own exemption so they can conspire with employers to substitute untaxed benefits for taxable wages,which strengthens the union’s hold on workers while shifting costs to other taxpayers.
As Miles Kimball,a University of Michigan economist who calls himself a “supply-side liberal,”wrote on his blog a couple of years ago:“Most unions are middle-class organizations that in their political activities are ready and willing to sacrifice the interests of the poor to benefit their members and their leaders.”
Mr. Walker’s revolution was driven by voters in towns and small cities who noticed that government workers had morphed into a privileged class—with the best pay, best benefits, longest vacations,and job security that made them basically unremovable.
Their dues, meanwhile, funded a political class that seemed indifferent to anyone else’s problems. Not always a friendly source,the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel this year credited Mr. Walker with having “shifted the policies of his state more than anyone else in generations.”...........
Aug 26, 2015: Illinois Democrats Try To Silence Gov. Rauner Over Union Talks "Democrats in the Illinois legislature may soon silence Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner by taking way his ability to negotiate with public unions.
SB1229 was introduced in February in response to troubled labor negotiations between Rauner and the Illinois chapter of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). The measure would allow an arbitrator to takeover state labor negotiations if a new agreement is not reached within 30 days.
Some have argued, though, that the bill is a huge giveaway to state unions. According to F. Vincent Vernuccio, labor policy expert at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, the measure will put power in the hands of unelected bureaucrats while allowing unions to stonewall deals they don’t like...."
Aug 20, 2015: Former Broward Teachers Union pres. steered illegal contributions to Clinton’s 2008 campaign
"....“It is alleged that after the BTU received the $80,000 payment from the School Board of Broward County, Santeramo authorized payments from the [union’s] Accountability Program account for himself and at least one other employee of the BTU to which they were not entitled,” DOJ said in a press release announcing the indictment.
Those funds were supposed to go toward training programs and leave time for teachers working on “accountability projects,” DOJ said. Instead, Santeramo pocketed tens of thousands of dollars in payments from Broward schools.
As he faces those charges, Santeramo is also awaiting trial in Broward County on 20 criminal counts, including racketeering, grand theft, fraud, money laundering, and charges involving illegal campaign contributions.
The latter involves alleged schemes to illegally direct tens of thousands of dollars to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign, among other political efforts...."
"Two of the country’s most powerful and politically influential labor unions are backing President Obama in the recent court challenge to his 2014 executive action on illegal immigration, saying they support the president’s effort because "undocumented workers" need more workplace protection and their participation helps the U.S. economy.
The AFL-CIO and the National Education Association on Monday each filed so-called amicus briefs in a federal appeals court case in which Texas and 26 other states are challenges the president’s 2014 memorandum on illegal immigration.
The memorandum essentially expands work authorization and delayed-deportation programs for illegal immigrants. And it provides similar opportunities for the parents of U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents.
The AFL-CIO’s 36-page brief essentially argues that Texas lacks the so-called “legal standing” to challenge the memorandum and that the administration didn’t violate procedural requirements in issuing the order.
However, the union also makes very clear its interest in the outcome of the proceedings.
“First, through existing collective bargaining relationships, AFL-CIO affiliates represent many undocumented workers in workplaces throughout the country,” according to the brief by the AFL-CIO, the country’s bigger union collective, with 56 unions representing roughly 12 million workers and retired workers....
A coalition of groups including the Service Employees International Union, the second-largest public service union and a big supporter of Democratic political candidates and organizations, filed an amicus brief in the original case.....
In other words, they’ve become very Naziesque. A tyrannical bunch of bastards.
"WASHINGTON -- President Obama has no current plans to visit Wisconsin despite pledging as a presidential candidate to “walk on that picket line” should workers be denied bargaining rights.
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters on Thursday that he was not aware of any plans for a trip to Wisconsin, as the state government there remains paralyzed over an anti-public union measure introduced by Gov. Scott Walker.
Labor protesters have been clamoring for Obama to visit the Badger State........"
"...Walker faced down the Left when he fought to restrict the ability of taxpayer-funded public unions to collectively bargain, among other measures to reduce their power. Despite a top-down effort from the White House to stop him and the leftist mob’s descent upon the state’s capitol building, Walker succeeded, going on to win a tough recall election. But his support in Iowa dropped from 18 percent to 11 after the first GOP primary debate took place.
Walker has used his victory to tout his foreign policy credentials as well.
“For years I’ve been concerned about that threat, not just abroad but here on American soil,” he said at CPAC in response to a question about the terrorist organization, ISIS. “If I can take on 100,000 protesters, I can do the same across the world.”
-----
Washington (CNN)Scott Walker will offer his foreign policy vision in a speech Friday mostly by contrasting it with what he terms a "retreat" from the world stage by the Obama White House.
"With all of the challenges we face around the globe today, now is not the time for untested leadership. I have been tested like no other candidate in this race," the Wisconsin governor will say, according to excerpts released early Friday morning. "As President, I will send the following message: the retreat is over." CNN
"The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has become a lightning rod for controversy under President Obama, with its aggressive actions fueling sustained warfare between business and labor."
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
It is important to note that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate labor. This is evidenced by a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices who clarified that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate commerce.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
And even if the states had delegated such powers to the feds, it remains that the Founding States had made the first numbered clauses in the Constitution, Sections 1-3 of Article I, evidently a good place to hide these clauses from Congress, to clarify that all federal legislative powers are vested in the elected members of Congress, not in the executive or judicial branches, or in non-elected federal bureaucrats like those running the NLRB.
So Congress has a constitutional monopoly on federal legislative powers whether it wants it or not. And by delegating federal legislative powers to NLRB, powers that Congress doesn’t have in the first place, corrupt Congress has blatantly ignored Sections 1-3 mentioned above.
The basic reason that the NLRB exists imo, is because the corrupt Senate failed to protect the states as the Founding States had intended for the Senate to do, the Senate doing so by not killing vote-winning bills which stole unique, 10th Amendment-protected state power to regulate labor.
The ill-conceived 17th Amendment needs to disappear, and corrupt senators and Constitution-ignoring federal bureaucrats like those running the unconstitutonal NLRB along with it.
Is there ANY Marxist front organization that HASN’T asserted its ‘power’ under Obama?
Subcontracting, a very common business practice, will become virtually unworkable. The National Labor Relations Board recently decided that businesses that “indirectly” control employees’ working conditions also legally employ them. Most media coverage has focused on how this decision affects franchises, but the ruling goes far beyond them. If it stands, it will make contracting and subcontracting almost impossible.
The case before the NLRB dealt with a recycling plant, Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI). Browning-Ferris paid another company, Leadpoint, to sort recycling materials. Leadpoint employees separated paper, plastic, glass, etc., on conveyor belts. These conveyor belts fed into recycling equipment, which BFI employees ran.
Leadpoint’s staff decided whom they would hire and fire, what the employees would earn, and what shifts they would work. They chose whom to promote and whom to discipline. BFI, in turn, decided what hours their plant ran, which lines would run each day, and how fast the conveyor belts moved. BFI also monitored Leadpoint’s quality and performance. BFI once caught a Leadpoint employee drinking a pint of whiskey on the job and asked for his termination.
The NLRB decided that this constituted enough “indirect” control to make BFI a co-employer of Leadpoint’s workers. If they unionize, the union will bargain jointly with both companies..................."
“They chose whom to promote and whom to discipline. BFI, in turn, decided what hours their plant ran, which lines would run each day, and how fast the conveyor belts moved. BFI also monitored Leadpoint’s quality and performance. BFI once caught a Leadpoint employee drinking a pint of whiskey on the job and asked for his termination.”
Through the years the IRS and Labor Board have increasingly tightened the noose around business owners (and companies) who hire anyone as an independent contractor. I’ve watched these rules grow in complexity since I started my business back in 1979. Back then many individuals were classified as independent contractors and I used their services in the course of business......BUT NOT ANY LONGER.
The IRS has “filters” in place to determine who is an independent contractor and who is an employee. It’s almost impossible to have anyone work for you as an independent contractor any longer.
Simple things like providing them tools, telling them when to work, having disciplinary control over them, providing a place to work, and in essence, ANY control over them other than paying for their services...and that is controlled by our now famous IRS form 1099.
Our legal system is deeply involved in the tort end of the contractor/employee legal goldmine as well as our politicians and labor union thugs.
“I don’t think we are in Kansas any more.”
They chose the wrong side
I see a new rallying point in a future Trump speech.
My last several years with a Fortune 500 company were like living in the Soviet Union. We became afraid to even speak with people we hadn’t known for a long time as they could report us for politically incorrect ideas or even racism. There was little or no appeal if this happened. Decisions were made about guilt or innocence with no input from the accused. We had the equivalent of political officers now called ethics officers or diversity managers. I saw just one McCain bumper sticker when he ran. (The owner told me, “It’s on the back of a Prius. What are they going to say?) When I asked McCain supporters why no stickers they said they were afraid of appearing political or of getting their car keyed. Not supporting Obama was to appear racist.
If the founding fathers could speak to us they would remindl us Congress has the power to pass a bill ending the NLRB, EPA, Obamacare and all of the government agencies responsible for tyranny. The Republican leadership would respond, “We know but Obama would veto the bill.”
The founding fathers would say, “If he vetoes the bill you still have the power of the purse to defund the agencies and you have the power to impeach a President who refuses to obey the law.”
The Republican leadership would not respond. Just as they haven’t responded to the people.
Which is the greater evil? The tyrant who terrorizes the people or the elected representatives the people put in office to stop the tyrant and who refuse to take action?
Sounds like a steroids version of a few University Of SC departments when I worked there years ago.
Those days are gone with the Leadership of Bonehead and McChuckles. Two of the biggest assclowns in the business. More worried about the Conservatives in their Party than the Rinos destroying the Party!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.