Posted on 12/12/2014 8:34:08 AM PST by Olog-hai
The National Labor Relations Board issued a final rule on Friday aimed at modernizing and streamlining the union election process.
The new rule will shorten the time between when an election is ordered and the election is held, eliminating a previous 25-day waiting period. And it seeks to reduce litigation that can be used to stall elections. It will also require employers to furnish union organizers with email addresses and phone numbers of workers. […]
AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said the NLRB’s “modest but important reforms” will help reduce delays and make it easier for workers to vote on forming a union. …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Romney is GOPe. GOPe are owned by the Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber doesn’t like unions.
Romney’s appointees to the NLRB would be Chamber-approved. Not union approved labor activists.
I used to work in a major medical center myself, and I know what you mean. One thing that should help..., aren’t they supposed to have to wait for a period of time before trying again, a few years or so?
I’ve forgotten this aspect of it.
What my medical center did was transfer all housekeeping and maintenance people to outside contracted firms.
Thus the main employees were professionals and those who were educated well enough to grasp that unions are not the way to go.
Perhaps her institution has done that. It could be a help if they haven’t.
The NLRB members are appointed by the President. Romney wouldn’t have appointed such far-left nuts to the NLRB. He’s been in business.
The liberals don’t like unions either, which is why they let them get short-term short-sighted “advantages” that damage them in the long run. How many unions got their Zerocare exemption thus far?
Why would Romney, as a left-wing man himself, not appoint far-left nuts that don’t appear as far left as who the Democrats would appoint? (Notice “appear”.)
I don’t think he’s far left on business issues or labor organization. I think he’s pretty soft—you could call it left—on social issues. Less so on international ones, but I don’t think that matters.
Depends on what you call “business”. The Chamber of Crony Corporatism is very anti-business, for example.
Well, there’s no need for us to argue on and on.
I live in MA. I thought Romney was OK for a while, but then he gave us RomneyCare. I thought he did it as a set up for his Presidential run, so he could say in the campaign, “Look, I fixed healthcare in MA.” Well, RomneyCare isn’t so great, and Obama likes to say it was the inspiration for his ACA mandate. I felt he left us in the lurch with that health plan as a strategic move for a 2008 candidacy. So, I’m not a huge Romney fan.
However, a number of things he said about foreign policy—like Russia as an adversary, and about the Middle East as affected by Obama’s current policies—turned out to be true.
Also, he understands how business works, and therefore I think he understands incentives, over-regulation, and tax policy.
He’s a mixed bag at best. I hope he isn’t our nominee in 2016. However, he’s better than Obama by a long shot, and on business matters, I don’t think he’s an automatic far-left on policy. I don’t think he would have loaded the NLRB with the type of far-left pro-union types Obama has, and that’s how this conversation started.
But, that’s my opinion, and since Romney is nothing at the moment, what diff does it make?
yes, but he’s Mormon /s
There is that. What they believe is unknown to many people, including myself. The unknown is either mysterious and beckoning, or mysterious and forbidding. I remember when it was said that JFK (Kennedy, not Kerry) couldn't be elected because he was Catholic in a majority Protestant country.
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.