Further undermining what little credibility it may still have, the American Bar Association held its annual labor law conference and loaded up the agenda with another one-sided panel discussion to attack the concept of employee free choice.

For the 4th year in a row, ABA political hacks have pointedly refused to allow the perspective of employees who may, God forbid, not want a union to dominate their workplace. Once again, a hot topic at the conference was the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation's cases defending employees whose rights are abused during card check organizing drives.

And yet again, the ABA meeting planners refused to allow the perspective of workers or their Right to Work attorneys to be heard -- instead selecting speakers representing Big Labor and a small faction of squishy, union-boss-friendly management lawyers. (Of course, the views of the speakers were rejected by the NLRB in its recent Dana/Metaldyne ruling, and the views of Foundation attorneys were embraced. Just a technicality, I guess.)

The ABA's intellectual dishonesty continues to be an embarrassment to America's legal profession.

National Right to Work attorneys' recent victory for employee free choice at the NLRB was the topic of much debate at a meeting of the pro-forced unionism American Bar Association, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer.

Union partisans typically condemned the newly established rights for employees. Once again, however, the meeting attendees did not get to hear from any representative from the National Right to Work Foundation, the group actually winning the main cases at issue and leading the charge to protect employees from "card check" organizing abuses.

Despite the hue and cry of union officials, the actions of the Bush NLRB to correct literally dozens of activist, pro-compulsory unionism rulings issued by the Clinton NLRB have been limited, delayed, and sparse. The Bush NLRB has a lot of work left to do and little time to do it.