Yesterday, Senate Democrats held hearings and called on Members of the National Labor Relations Board to speak about their views of the NLRB.
Member Wilma Liebman, one of the most fiercely pro-compulsory unionism members ever to sit on the National Labor Relations Board, testified about what she described as “a loss of confidence in the board and its processes.”
To understand what she means by that, watch the following video clip of her testifying about the NLRB back in December before a House committee. Not long after the four minute mark of the video, Liebman bemoans the fact that, according to her, the currently NLRB seems too preoccupied with “freedom of choice”:
“The Board has said for the first time that freedom of choice – which is to say the freedom to reject unionization – prevails in the statutory scheme over promoting collective bargaining.”
So there you have it: Big Labor’s real problem with recent NLRB decisions is that the Board is protecting freedom of choice too strongly, thus allowing workers to reject unionization.









Comments
Problems of Democracy
It appears that Ms. Liebman finds that respect for the foundations of democratic freedom are an impediment to the ability of organized labor to gain membership and power.
Can you imagine allowing workers to be free to reject union representation and to refrain from union activity? It is really going overboard for the NLRB to actually respect the private property rights of employers and give credence to the idea that workplace civility is a legitimate goal.
Apparently, she regards freedom antithetical to the goals of organized labor.
I think that she is right.
Bismarck