Court Strikes Down Obama Labor Board’s Ambush Election Rule Change
Challenged rules would allow union bosses to ambush workers into forced-dues-paying union ranks
Washington, D.C. (May 14, 2012) – Today, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has struck down the National Labor Relations Board's new rules dictating how union organizing elections are conducted, ruling that the Board did not have a quorum necessary to enact the new rules.
The National Right to Work Foundation – the nation's premier advocate for workers who suffer from the abuses of compulsory unionism – filed comments opposing the Board's proposed new guidelines which would help give union organizers the upper hand over independent-minded employees.
The new rules dramatically shortened the time frame individual workers have to share truthful information with their coworkers about the adverse effects of unionization and to hear their employer's views on the subject. In other words, the new rules were one-sided.
Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work, issued the following statement regarding the ruling:
"The Obama NLRB is determined to make union organizing campaigns as one-sided as possible and to stifle the rights of employees who may oppose bringing a union into their workplace. Today, the court's ruling demonstrates once again the biased way that the Obama Labor Board has operated – a two member majority ramming through the final pro-union boss rule change without even asking the one minority member to vote.
"Today's decision prevents implementation of a rule that deprives employees of hearing both sides of the story about unionization and is a victory for workers. However, despite this decision, a secret ballot election can't prevent the fundamental violation of individual rights that occurs under union boss monopoly bargaining."
Comments
What are the time frames?
Could you please put in your stories the actual changes? Like how it can take over a month to have an election, when a majority of workers want one. From my understanding it lowers the time frame to 2-3 weeks after the request. It takes more than 21 days to make an informed decision? What happens in the current over extended elections is just the opposite of what is being stated. Employers use scare tactics to spread fear among its workers with threats of closing their doors, firing people and even stalking their employees. I can't imagine that an employer needs more than 21 days to state their views and side considering they see the workers everyday. Unions may only see the workers a couple of times, which gives the employers ample time to strike fear into their employees.
Are you referring to the
Are you referring to the couple of times the union thugs see the undecided employee in the parking lot and walk them to their car, just to 'discuss' the consequences of not voting to allow the union into the work place? Or the couple of times they see the employees in the union shop, just to make sure the dues are paid and no one is complaining about how the union rep always sells them out to the boss at the grievance meetings?
Sorry for you views
Well if you have witnessed some wrongdoing or coerision from union reps then all I can say is SORRY. In every aspect of life there will be individuals that can ruin the image of many. "One bad apple ruins the bunch". As a second generation roofer I have seen the benefits of joining a building and trades union first hand. As a organizer I talk to non-union roofers daily, and your statement is half true. I do walk up to them to discuss the benefits that a union might have to offer them. Voting only comes when there is a majority of workers who want to join the union and the employer is not. I approach them to see how they feel about their working conditions and wages. If they are happy at their current employment, then I leave a card in case they need some employment in the future. I've been organizer for over a year and have witnessed 4 people come in this year that had received a card from a rep. years ago. As far as us hanging around our shops it is just not TRUE in our local. Our contractors will not allow us to just stand around and talk to their employees while on the clock.
cantstandupformyself.
What 's the matter, you were for a union and didn't have balls enough to stand up to the company to tell them????? I bet you had nothing to do with organizing a company . Just repeating lies that you have heard.
The majority rules in an union election, if you want it vote for it, if you don't vote against it. The majority rules. If you don't like the results , quit and find a place that fits your views.
There is NO SUCH THING AS FORCED UNION DUES. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO PAY THEM, GO FIND A JOB WITH THE MORE THAN 88% THAT IS NON UNION.
WHY ARE YOU SO SET IN DECIDING WHO I CAN WORK FOR WHEN I DON'T FORCE YOU TO WORK FOR A UNION???????????
HOW ABOUT MY RIGHTS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION ?????? DOES THE CONSTITUTION AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS ONLY APPLY TO YOU AND WHAT YOU
THINK????????
Sell-outs and Forced Union Dues
Despite your ludicrous over-emphasis and apparent attempt at shouting, I'll answer you. I worked as an outside consultant and supervised a union staff of over 45 porters and launderers for a 460 bed nursing home. I worked for my company. The staff worked for the home, as did the administrator/mgmnt. I routinely saw the mgmnt of the home write up my staff and when the issue rose to grievance level the administrator and union rep would meet first, without the employee and quietly over inter-office telephone. When the employee went in for the grievance meeting, he had no idea his future had already been decided behind his back and likely not in his favor.
You are right the majority rules in a union election. That permits the tyranny of the majority, where union dues are often taken out of an employee's paycheck before he gets it, to make sure the union gets its money. That money is used to pursue political agendas the employee might not like. Too bad, though, because if it's a union shop the union gets its money and can use it the way the bosses see fit. Like nice salaries and cushy perks for themselves. In civil service, it's the government taking out the dues, then the gov't. gives it to the union, and the union spends it on politics, electing the very people who will keep the system running so the dues get taken, the unions get the money and the politicians get paid by union 'lobbyists'. A giant money machine. What a racket!
If unions are so great, why can't they allow a non-union employee in the shop, one who might get a better deal because of his skills? Because the competition would make it look bad for the union, who can only bargain at the mid-level rating of mediocre so it can protect the bad apples under the claim of protecting everyone.
I don't recall telling you who you can work for, so I'm not sure where that came in. Also not sure of the bit about the Constitution, either. We all have the same rights to bargain with each other for any type of legal contract, like employment. Unions actually strip away some workers' rights, come to think of it, by telling non-union people they no longer have the right to make their own contract with that employer. Once it's a union shop, the union won't let any contract apply but the one it bargains for; too bad if you think you are more skilled and can get better. Your fate has been tied to the union, now.
They do smartguy
In a RTW state companies are allowed to hire non-union employees. Here's the BS, they are also entitled to use our health care, pensions, and representation if they are fired.
How is it fair to allow someone to join my health plan that doesn't pay their share to fund the Plan? Enjoy my pension benefits w/o ever contributing to the cost to run a pension?
To ask for representation when not paying for it?
These are all true facts about RTW that nobody wants to acknowledge. If you allow a large number of people to join our plans w/o having to contribute to the cost of running the plans(which means hiring people to oversee and keep records)then in time it will bankrupt the funds. Which is the whole agenda of RTW.
Right to Play
Hey lets enact a right to play law. That says I can play at any golf course w/o having to pay some kind of "DUES".
What do you think will happen to the course? It will become run down, from no one paying any dues to keep the course in good shape. Why pay dues if you don't have too? To ensure the quality of the course, but I don't have to pay it's a RIGHT TO PLAY state.
While you make a valid point
While you make a valid point to some degree, I think you need to rethink what you've said. What you're saying, in my understanding, is that people believe lies when it comes to organizing a company. Yes, the majority rules in any kind of voting. You say there is no such thing as forced union dues and then say if you don't want to pay them, go find a job that is non-union. What you mean is your profession wouldn't be worth much if you didn't have a union to back you up. I worked for a union and put in 11 years to see that once I got laid off (due to seniority) that the people who stayed were nothing but a bunch of lazy ass people who milked the system of overtime and hours. I will never work for another union shop again and I make just as much money as I did when I was in a union. Now, as far as your rights go, you better take a look in the mirror and remember that I have the same rights as you. Unfortunately, you don't like something and you go crying like a little kid who got his candy taken away from him. Well, I think it is about you not having the education to carry you. Of course, because you probably don't like raises based on merit, that tells me you yourself are probably one of those many "lazy asses" that I was talking about. If you want to sit here and complain about how you are all upset because someone else DOESN'T want a union, then you better expect that as long as unions are corrupt, and we all know there is some kind politics involved, then there is more to what you say in terms of how unions run businesses. Rid the world of unions and start working on merit. If you are any kind of a decent worker, then you will know that you will always have a job lined up for you.
Common Sense?
I work in a building and trades union as a roofer. First of all I would like to see you come up on a commercial roof site were they are tearing off and call them a bunch of lazy asses. I would bet my house you wouldn't.
Use some common sense I make $45 an hour and most non-union roofers make around $15. I make 3x's as much, which means I have to be 3x's faster to stay competitive. And since my union has been around for over a 100 years I would say that us making 3x's as much and were still here working means I'm 3x's as productive. Thanks to our ever growing apprenticeship program that teaches us how to be more productive and install roofs properly.
There are some people at your so called merit shops who make a comparable wage. Problem is, it is always the bosses son, or some one who has a brown streak on thier nose. They sell out their fellow workers to for their personel gains. A sellout. Not to mention they do not dare teach anyone the skill they might have for the thought that they could be replaced by someone willing to sell them out after learning a trade. In a union we all make an equal wage which encourages growth and education.
I forgot to mention we actually pay for roofers to go to our school. We Pay for them to Learn. Can you think of any organization that pays you to learn a trade/skill that you can make a career out of.
Paid training
Many companies pay to train their employees. In law school I met an engineer being paid by his company to become an attorney. He collected his salary and they paid for tuition, books and expenses. Many companies will pay to have workers increase their education and thus their value to the company - and hopefully the economy as a whole. That's not much of an argument. Really, any place you go to work for will need to train you for the job and most of that training is useful in life overall. Except for the Navy, where being a steam turbine specialist left me with having had an adventure, but gotten no career. My father taught me that any job worth its salt will pay you for the time you train - otherwise it's like your working for free while they have a hold on your time.
Helmuts to Hardhats
Unions have a program for service men entering the workforce. You should look into it it's called "Helmuts to Hardhats". It is set up for people who have served this country to be able to come back and have another career that you can afford to live on.
Yes I'm sure there are plenty of companies willing to send a couple of people to school to better their education in hopes of expanded their company. But I'm talking about every worker. From the kid out of high school or the one who dropped out. Our schooling is for every worker- not just the FAVORED employees.
I've been to several career fairs and the majority of employers require some form of education aside from High School. Which cost money, heck many places offer no training it's just a job. I've been taught a skilled trade that I can take all over the world to make money.
I can't name one non-union construction company that sends and pays their workers to advance their skills in a specific trade.