{"id":2153,"date":"2012-06-19T17:20:34","date_gmt":"2012-06-19T21:20:34","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"-0001-11-30T04:00:00","slug":"nlrb-watch-new-nlrb-webpage-boldly-demonstrates-forced-unionism-bias","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/nlrb-watch-new-nlrb-webpage-boldly-demonstrates-forced-unionism-bias\/","title":{"rendered":"NLRB Watch: New NLRB Webpage Boldly Demonstrates Forced Unionism Bias"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>On June 18, 2012, the NLRB announced the \u201claunch\u201d of its webpage describing \u201cProtected Concerted Activity\u201d.  As the Board notes in its press release, the right to engage in protected or lawful concerted activities is part of the original National Labor Relations Act of 1935 and has been part of NLRB case law for 77 years.  Indeed, the Board\u2019s first case decision, <i>Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, Inc.<\/i>, 1 NLRB 1, 47 (December 7, 1935), addresses concerted activity.  Typical of the current NLRB, however, the press release bold faces the statute\u2019s Section 7 right \u201cto engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection,\u201d but does not bold the remainder of the statutory sentence: <b>\u201cand shall also have the right to refrain from any or all such activities.\u201d<\/b><\/p>\n<p>Why after 77 years, is the NLRB highlighting \u201cprotected concerted activity\u201d?  Is it because the agency\u2019s caseload has diminished over the years, and it is desperate to ramp up activity to justify its ever increasing federal budget?  Comparing fiscal year 2011 with fiscal year 2000, unfair labor practice charges filed dropped 24 percent and representation case petitions filed dropped 50 percent, yet the agency\u2019s budget grew by 31 percent.\n<\/p>\n<p>Or, is the current NLRB pushing internet outreach to help unions reverse their losses?  Private sector union membership declined 23 percent from 2000 to 2011.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the current NLRB is increasing its outreach for both of these reasons, as well as to do an end run around the pending litigation before the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals for the District of Columbia and the Fourth Circuits challenging the Board\u2019s efforts to require employers to post notices of employee rights despite lack of statutory authority to do so.<\/p>\n<p>The Board\u2019s public outreach efforts have expanded over the years.  For decades the NLRB has published brochures explaining the National Labor Relations Act and what the agency does to enforce statutory rights.  The Board\u2019s website has posted announcements and news releases since 1999.  All Board decisions are published and available on the internet.  Board Members, its General Counsel, and senior personnel speak at scores of public meetings each year, including trips to foreign countries (despite the fact that the statute applies only in U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories).<\/p>\n<p>However, the Obama NLRB, led by its majority of former union attorneys, has significantly increased the agency\u2019s public relations activities. In the Fall of 2009, the NLRB created a new Office of Public Affairs (OPA) for the announced purpose of increasing public engagement.  From October 14, 2009, to date, the OPA has issued 227 News Releases in addition to scores of \u201cannouncements,\u201d other publications and web postings.  Of the 227 releases, 95 concern agency institutional matters, 118 report favorable outcomes for unions, and only 14 outcomes favoring employers or employees opposed to unionization.<\/p>\n<p>The new Board webpage highlights recent \u201cProtected Concerted Activity cases, identifying the employer and Board action taken.  It does not highlight any union violations of the NLRA. This one-sided effort \u2013 like the Board\u2019s press office\u2019s news release program \u2013  complements the Obama Department of Labor\u2019s tidal wave of pro-union public outreach under the banner \u201cPlan, Protect, Prevent\u201d and the AFL-CIO website\u2019s mapping of employer citations for a variety of workplace law violations.<\/p>\n<p>The NLRB made clear its purpose in its press release announcing the new webpage \u2013 \u201cNon-union concerted activity accounts for more than 5% of the agency\u2019s recent caseload.\u201d  And current NLRB Chairman Pearce, a former union-side attorney, revealed the bottom line \u2013 \u201dOur hope is that other workers will see themselves in the cases we\u2019ve selected and understand that they do have strength in numbers.\u201d  So, if \u201corganized\u201d labor can\u2019t increase its numbers by itself, the National LABOR Relations Board will do it for the union bosses.  Quite apart from the concern for adjudicatory neutrality, the NLRB has demonstrated that, despite deliberate Congressional silence \u2013 in this case, regarding notice posting of rights to organize \u2013 an independent agency can do an end run and through administrative action accomplish what Congress has refused to do.<\/p>\n<p>\nLast NLRB Watch: &quot;<a href=\"\/en\/nlrb-watch\/nlrb-watch-divide-and-conquer-micro-units\">Divide and Conquer: NLRB now granting union officials compulsory unionism power over &#8216;micro&#8217; units<\/a>&quot;\n<\/p>\n<p>Next NLRB Watch: &quot;<a href=\"\/en\/nlrb-watch\/nlrb-watch-first-contract-bargaining-impasse-lawful-12102012\">First Contract Bargaining Impasse Lawful<\/a>&quot;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>On June 18, 2012, the NLRB announced the \u201claunch\u201d of its webpage describing \u201cProtected Concerted Activity\u201d.  As the Board notes in its press release, the right to engage in protected or lawful concerted activities is part of the original National Labor Relations Act of 1935 and has been part of NLRB case law for 77 years.  Indeed, the Board\u2019s first case decision, <i>Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, Inc.<\/i>, 1 NLRB 1, 47 (December 7, 1935), addresses concerted activity.  Typical of the current NLRB, however, the press release bold faces the statute\u2019s Section 7 right \u201cto engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection,\u201d but does not bold the remainder of the statutory sentence: <b>\u201cand shall also have the right to refrain from any or all such activities.\u201d<\/b><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":435,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-2153","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>NLRB Watch: New NLRB Webpage Boldly Demonstrates Forced Unionism Bias - National Right to Work Foundation<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/nlrb-watch-new-nlrb-webpage-boldly-demonstrates-forced-unionism-bias\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"es_ES\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"NLRB Watch: New NLRB Webpage Boldly Demonstrates Forced Unionism Bias - National Right to Work Foundation\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"On June 18, 2012, the NLRB announced the \u201claunch\u201d of its webpage describing \u201cProtected Concerted Activity\u201d. As the Board notes in its press release, the right to engage in protected or lawful concerted activities is part of the original National Labor Relations Act of 1935 and has been part of NLRB case law for 77 years. Indeed, the Board\u2019s first case decision, Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, Inc., 1 NLRB 1, 47 (December 7, 1935), addresses concerted activity. Typical of the current NLRB, however, the press release bold faces the statute\u2019s Section 7 right \u201cto engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection,\u201d but does not bold the remainder of the statutory sentence: \u201cand shall also have the right to refrain from any or all such activities.\u201d\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/nlrb-watch-new-nlrb-webpage-boldly-demonstrates-forced-unionism-bias\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"National Right to Work Foundation\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Tiempo de lectura\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"3 minutos\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/nlrb-watch-new-nlrb-webpage-boldly-demonstrates-forced-unionism-bias\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/nlrb-watch-new-nlrb-webpage-boldly-demonstrates-forced-unionism-bias\\\/\",\"name\":\"NLRB Watch: New NLRB Webpage Boldly Demonstrates Forced Unionism Bias - National Right to Work Foundation\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\",\"inLanguage\":\"es\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/nlrb-watch-new-nlrb-webpage-boldly-demonstrates-forced-unionism-bias\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/\",\"name\":\"National Right to Work Foundation\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"es\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"NLRB Watch: New NLRB Webpage Boldly Demonstrates Forced Unionism Bias - National Right to Work Foundation","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/nlrb-watch-new-nlrb-webpage-boldly-demonstrates-forced-unionism-bias\/","og_locale":"es_ES","og_type":"article","og_title":"NLRB Watch: New NLRB Webpage Boldly Demonstrates Forced Unionism Bias - National Right to Work Foundation","og_description":"On June 18, 2012, the NLRB announced the \u201claunch\u201d of its webpage describing \u201cProtected Concerted Activity\u201d. As the Board notes in its press release, the right to engage in protected or lawful concerted activities is part of the original National Labor Relations Act of 1935 and has been part of NLRB case law for 77 years. Indeed, the Board\u2019s first case decision, Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, Inc., 1 NLRB 1, 47 (December 7, 1935), addresses concerted activity. Typical of the current NLRB, however, the press release bold faces the statute\u2019s Section 7 right \u201cto engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection,\u201d but does not bold the remainder of the statutory sentence: \u201cand shall also have the right to refrain from any or all such activities.\u201d","og_url":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/nlrb-watch-new-nlrb-webpage-boldly-demonstrates-forced-unionism-bias\/","og_site_name":"National Right to Work Foundation","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Tiempo de lectura":"3 minutos"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/nlrb-watch-new-nlrb-webpage-boldly-demonstrates-forced-unionism-bias\/","url":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/nlrb-watch-new-nlrb-webpage-boldly-demonstrates-forced-unionism-bias\/","name":"NLRB Watch: New NLRB Webpage Boldly Demonstrates Forced Unionism Bias - National Right to Work Foundation","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/#website"},"datePublished":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","inLanguage":"es","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/nlrb-watch-new-nlrb-webpage-boldly-demonstrates-forced-unionism-bias\/"]}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/","name":"National Right to Work Foundation","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"es"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2153","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/435"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2153"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2153\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2153"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}