Obama’s Job Killing Gift to Big Labor - ambushing the economy’s job-creators

The Obama administration rewarded its union allies last month with a decision that threatens millions of jobs and thousands of businesses, from staffing agencies to cleaning services and auto-repair shops to construction companies. In a case involving Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI), the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decided to unilaterally redefine the concept of joint employment—when more than one business is responsible for an employee or group of employees—and made it easier to unionize large corporations. This ruling could have a devastating effect on small businesses, job creation, and the U.S. economy..........

Before last week, two businesses were deemed joint employers only when they both exercised substantial, direct and immediate control over hiring, firing, disciplining, supervising, and directing workers. Now, however, the NLRB has expanded the definition of “joint employer” to include indirect control, unexercised potential control, and a fuzzy notion of “the totality of a putative employer’s influence over employees’ working conditions.”

By defining companies as joint employers, the NLRB threatens the ability of American businesses to grow and create jobs. By giving unions the ability to drag the parent corporation to the bargaining table, the NLRB’s decision will disrupt many kinds of longstanding, beneficial business arrangements—franchise businesses, temp and staffing agencies, and contractors—that employ millions of Americans. It hinders innovation, prohibits flexible work arrangements, and makes it much harder for entrepreneurs to start new businesses.

........Ultimately, the NLRB’s decision advances a few special interests while endangering 770,000 franchise businesses and countless firms that use outsourcing, which adds up to 8.5 million employees and temporary staff. American business relies on independent operators or franchisees. This system is threatened by making the larger firm liable for the employment practices of entities it may not be able to control. The result will be fewer new businesses being created....

Sept 14, 2015: “...Experts were taken aback by the scope of Walker’s proposals, which seek to undo decades of law and would gut the landmark National Relations Labor Act (NRLB) — adopted in 1935 and signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt at the height of the Great Depression.

“I’ve never seen anything like this,” said Ann Hodges, a professor at the University of Richmond who has studied labor law for more than 40 years. “This will take the breath away from anyone who’s worked in labor relations for any length of time. ... It’s pretty draconian.”

Walker’s plan also calls for prohibiting automatic withdrawal of union dues to be used for political purposes and forbidding union organizers to access employees’ personal information, such as their phone numbers.

Lee Adler, a labor law expert at Cornell University, said Walker’s proposals would eliminate workers’ rights and make it more difficult for people to join the middle class.”

March 31, 2015: Obama vetoes NLRB legislation

"In one of his first clashes with the new Republican-dominated Congress over labor policy, President Obama vetoed a GOP-backed resolution Tuesday that would halt a National Labor Relations Board rule making it easier for workers to hold so-called “ambush” union-organizing elections.

It was Mr. Obama’s second veto since Republicans took control of the Senate in January, following his rejection in February of a measure that would have expedited the construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline...."

Sept 2, 2015: NLRB and Small Business: Tensions Heightened Under Obama

"The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has pushed for rules that critics argue have favored unions and targeted the small business community. The board's latest controversial decision came last week, in a ruling that makes employers liable for labor violations committed by business partners and contractors.

The Hill reported five other NLRB rulings that were decided during President Obama's tenure that were against the best interest of small business. “There’s perhaps no labor board that has done more for organized labor than this one has,” Michael Lotito, an employment and labor attorney, told the The Hill. The labor board has “really put the wind back in the sails of unions,” said Beth Milito, NFIB Senior Legal Counsel, according to The Hill....."

“........Ultimately, the NLRB’s decision advances a few special interests while endangering 770,000 franchise businesses and countless firms that use outsourcing, which adds up to 8.5 million employees and temporary staff.”

—

So is this ruling bad for companies which outsource?

I’m all for it, if that is the case.

America needs to stop chasing jobs to foreign countries.

No, this ruling creates the liberty of markets. The NLRB are pro-union central planners. Conservatives are against central planning.

Now, in as much as outsourcing is legal and economically good, it will have no negative effect on outsourcing.

Your issue is off shoring and this change will be part of the regulatory relief that will make American businesses more competitive with their foreign rivals. Isn’t that what you want?

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.