{"id":2741,"date":"2008-03-28T09:49:10","date_gmt":"2008-03-28T09:49:10","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2016-08-09T18:20:22","modified_gmt":"2016-08-09T18:20:22","slug":"employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/news\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\/","title":{"rendered":"Employee Rights Group Opposes Federal Bureaucracy\u2019s Devious Proposal to Legitimize Abusive Union Organizing Campaigns"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>\n    Washington, DC (March 28, 2008) \u2013 The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation filed <a href=\"\/files\/nrtw\/NRTW and Employee Final Comments.pdf\">its opposition<\/a> to a package of sweeping rule changes proposed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) bureaucracy that would further undermine the right of American workers to choose freely whether to form a union.  The Foundation filed its comments on behalf of itself and three employees victimized by coercive \u201ccard check\u201d unionization drives in California, Ohio, and South Carolina, respectively.\n<\/p>\n<p>\n    Under the proposed rules, colluding union officials and company officials could trigger a quick-snap union certification election even when no employees have expressed any interest in unionization.  The proposed changes would toss aside traditional NLRB certification safeguards while effectively barring employees from challenging any misconduct or unfair labor practices.\n<\/p>\n<p>\n    Additionally, an NLRB rubberstamp could be obtained despite strategic gerrymandering of bargaining units and even where no advance notice of the election is provided to employees.\n<\/p>\n<p>\n    The proposed NLRB rules also appear to contradict the National Labor Relations Act by unilaterally shortening the statute of limitations for filing unfair labor practice charges from six months to seven days.  The proposed rules would also unlawfully leave employee allegations of misconduct to the unappealable discretion of NLRB Regional Directors, cutting the Board and appellate courts out of the process.\n<\/p>\n<p>\n    \u201cThe NLRB\u2019s devious proposal would \u2018rent out\u2019 federal oversight of representation elections to union officials and certain employers who have caved in to extortionate pressure campaigns intended to induce them to hand over their employees to forced unionism,\u201d stated Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation.  \u201cThe NLRB should not further erode employees\u2019 freedom to resist unwanted unionization, nor should it so crassly provide a veneer of legitimacy to coercive and often illegal union organizing tactics.\u201d\n<\/p>\n<p>\n    The Foundation\u2019s comments cite that the proposed changes would rapidly accelerate a trend of coercive \u201ctop down\u201d union organizing drives.  Such drives often include \u201ccorporate campaigns\u201d where a non-union company is targeted with ugly PR onslaughts, trumped up lawsuits, and political pressure.\n<\/p>\n<p>\n    \u201cIn short, the proposed rules must be viewed in the context of union efforts to destroy both the full and open debate inherent in\u2026 the NLRA-established secret ballot election process, and replace them with \u201cneutrality agreements,\u201d forced employer silence, non-existent election campaigns, employees\u2019 inability to object or organize a movement to oppose unionization, and union selection via either \u201ccard check\u201d or rapid-fire consent elections,\u201d wrote Foundation staff attorneys Glenn Taubman and Bill Messenger.<!--break--><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>\n    Washington, DC (March 28, 2008) \u2013 The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation filed <a href=\"\/files\/nrtw\/NRTW and Employee Final Comments.pdf\">its opposition<\/a> to a package of sweeping rule changes proposed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) bureaucracy that would further undermine the right of American workers to choose freely whether to form a union.  The Foundation filed its comments on behalf of itself and three employees victimized by coercive \u201ccard check\u201d unionization drives in California, Ohio, and South Carolina, respectively.\n<\/p>\n<p>\n    Under the proposed rules, colluding union officials and company officials could trigger a quick-snap union certification election even when no employees have expressed any interest in unionization.  The proposed changes would toss aside traditional NLRB certification safeguards while effectively barring employees from challenging any misconduct or unfair labor practices.\n<\/p>\n<p>\n    Additionally, an NLRB rubberstamp could be obtained despite strategic gerrymandering of bargaining units and even where no advance notice of the election is provided to employees.\n<\/p>\n<p>\n    The proposed NLRB rules also appear to contradict the National Labor Relations Act by unilaterally shortening the statute of limitations for filing unfair labor practice charges from six months to seven days.  The proposed rules would also unlawfully leave employee allegations of misconduct to the unappealable discretion of NLRB Regional Directors, cutting the Board and appellate courts out of the process.\n<\/p>\n<p>\n    \u201cThe NLRB\u2019s devious proposal would \u2018rent out\u2019 federal oversight of representation elections to union officials and certain employers who have caved in to extortionate pressure campaigns intended to induce them to hand over their employees to forced unionism,\u201d stated Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation.  \u201cThe NLRB should not further erode employees\u2019 freedom to resist unwanted unionization, nor should it so crassly provide a veneer of legitimacy to coercive and often illegal union organizing tactics.\u201d\n<\/p>\n<p>\n    The Foundation\u2019s comments cite that the proposed changes would rapidly accelerate a trend of coercive \u201ctop down\u201d union organizing drives.  Such drives often include \u201ccorporate campaigns\u201d where a non-union company is targeted with ugly PR onslaughts, trumped up lawsuits, and political pressure.\n<\/p>\n<p>\n    \u201cIn short, the proposed rules must be viewed in the context of union efforts to destroy both the full and open debate inherent in\u2026 the NLRA-established secret ballot election process, and replace them with \u201cneutrality agreements,\u201d forced employer silence, non-existent election campaigns, employees\u2019 inability to object or organize a movement to oppose unionization, and union selection via either \u201ccard check\u201d or rapid-fire consent elections,\u201d wrote Foundation staff attorneys Glenn Taubman and Bill Messenger.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[888],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2741","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.5 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Employee Rights Group Opposes Federal Bureaucracy\u2019s Devious Proposal to Legitimize Abusive Union Organizing Campaigns - 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\/es\/news\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"es_ES\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Employee Rights Group Opposes Federal Bureaucracy\u2019s Devious Proposal to Legitimize Abusive Union Organizing Campaigns - National Right to Work Foundation\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Washington, DC (March 28, 2008) \u2013 The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation filed its opposition to a package of sweeping rule changes proposed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) bureaucracy that would further undermine the right of American workers to choose freely whether to form a union. The Foundation filed its comments on behalf of itself and three employees victimized by coercive \u201ccard check\u201d unionization drives in California, Ohio, and South Carolina, respectively.     Under the proposed rules, colluding union officials and company officials could trigger a quick-snap union certification election even when no employees have expressed any interest in unionization. The proposed changes would toss aside traditional NLRB certification safeguards while effectively barring employees from challenging any misconduct or unfair labor practices.     Additionally, an NLRB rubberstamp could be obtained despite strategic gerrymandering of bargaining units and even where no advance notice of the election is provided to employees.     The proposed NLRB rules also appear to contradict the National Labor Relations Act by unilaterally shortening the statute of limitations for filing unfair labor practice charges from six months to seven days. The proposed rules would also unlawfully leave employee allegations of misconduct to the unappealable discretion of NLRB Regional Directors, cutting the Board and appellate courts out of the process.     \u201cThe NLRB\u2019s devious proposal would \u2018rent out\u2019 federal oversight of representation elections to union officials and certain employers who have caved in to extortionate pressure campaigns intended to induce them to hand over their employees to forced unionism,\u201d stated Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. \u201cThe NLRB should not further erode employees\u2019 freedom to resist unwanted unionization, nor should it so crassly provide a veneer of legitimacy to coercive and often illegal union organizing tactics.\u201d     The Foundation\u2019s comments cite that the proposed changes would rapidly accelerate a trend of coercive \u201ctop down\u201d union organizing drives. Such drives often include \u201ccorporate campaigns\u201d where a non-union company is targeted with ugly PR onslaughts, trumped up lawsuits, and political pressure.      \u201cIn short, the proposed rules must be viewed in the context of union efforts to destroy both the full and open debate inherent in\u2026 the NLRA-established secret ballot election process, and replace them with \u201cneutrality agreements,\u201d forced employer silence, non-existent election campaigns, employees\u2019 inability to object or organize a movement to oppose unionization, and union selection via either \u201ccard check\u201d or rapid-fire consent elections,\u201d wrote Foundation staff attorneys Glenn Taubman and Bill Messenger.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/news\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"National Right to Work Foundation\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-03-28T09:49:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-09T18:20:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal Information\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Escrito por\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal Information\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Tiempo de lectura\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutos\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/es\\\/news\\\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/es\\\/news\\\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal Information\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/81f7d2108bad2dd3d10068a71f2e3f8f\"},\"headline\":\"Employee Rights Group Opposes Federal Bureaucracy\u2019s Devious Proposal to Legitimize Abusive Union Organizing Campaigns\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-28T09:49:10+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-09T18:20:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/es\\\/news\\\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":421,\"commentCount\":0,\"articleSection\":[\"News Releases\"],\"inLanguage\":\"es\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/es\\\/news\\\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/es\\\/news\\\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/es\\\/news\\\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\\\/\",\"name\":\"Employee Rights Group Opposes Federal Bureaucracy\u2019s Devious Proposal to Legitimize Abusive Union Organizing Campaigns - National Right to Work Foundation\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-28T09:49:10+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-09T18:20:22+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/81f7d2108bad2dd3d10068a71f2e3f8f\"},\"inLanguage\":\"es\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/es\\\/news\\\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\\\/\"]}]},{\"@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\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/81f7d2108bad2dd3d10068a71f2e3f8f\",\"name\":\"Legal Information\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"es\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/9dd8b017e6d8f6d3a8f6565a48c44ec34db5e7a0837308bad9505aaa64ba93fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/9dd8b017e6d8f6d3a8f6565a48c44ec34db5e7a0837308bad9505aaa64ba93fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/9dd8b017e6d8f6d3a8f6565a48c44ec34db5e7a0837308bad9505aaa64ba93fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal Information\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.nrtw.org\\\/es\\\/author\\\/nrtw\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Employee Rights Group Opposes Federal Bureaucracy\u2019s Devious Proposal to Legitimize Abusive Union Organizing Campaigns - 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\/es\/news\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\/","og_locale":"es_ES","og_type":"article","og_title":"Employee Rights Group Opposes Federal Bureaucracy\u2019s Devious Proposal to Legitimize Abusive Union Organizing Campaigns - National Right to Work Foundation","og_description":"Washington, DC (March 28, 2008) \u2013 The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation filed its opposition to a package of sweeping rule changes proposed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) bureaucracy that would further undermine the right of American workers to choose freely whether to form a union. The Foundation filed its comments on behalf of itself and three employees victimized by coercive \u201ccard check\u201d unionization drives in California, Ohio, and South Carolina, respectively.     Under the proposed rules, colluding union officials and company officials could trigger a quick-snap union certification election even when no employees have expressed any interest in unionization. The proposed changes would toss aside traditional NLRB certification safeguards while effectively barring employees from challenging any misconduct or unfair labor practices.     Additionally, an NLRB rubberstamp could be obtained despite strategic gerrymandering of bargaining units and even where no advance notice of the election is provided to employees.     The proposed NLRB rules also appear to contradict the National Labor Relations Act by unilaterally shortening the statute of limitations for filing unfair labor practice charges from six months to seven days. The proposed rules would also unlawfully leave employee allegations of misconduct to the unappealable discretion of NLRB Regional Directors, cutting the Board and appellate courts out of the process.     \u201cThe NLRB\u2019s devious proposal would \u2018rent out\u2019 federal oversight of representation elections to union officials and certain employers who have caved in to extortionate pressure campaigns intended to induce them to hand over their employees to forced unionism,\u201d stated Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. \u201cThe NLRB should not further erode employees\u2019 freedom to resist unwanted unionization, nor should it so crassly provide a veneer of legitimacy to coercive and often illegal union organizing tactics.\u201d     The Foundation\u2019s comments cite that the proposed changes would rapidly accelerate a trend of coercive \u201ctop down\u201d union organizing drives. Such drives often include \u201ccorporate campaigns\u201d where a non-union company is targeted with ugly PR onslaughts, trumped up lawsuits, and political pressure.      \u201cIn short, the proposed rules must be viewed in the context of union efforts to destroy both the full and open debate inherent in\u2026 the NLRA-established secret ballot election process, and replace them with \u201cneutrality agreements,\u201d forced employer silence, non-existent election campaigns, employees\u2019 inability to object or organize a movement to oppose unionization, and union selection via either \u201ccard check\u201d or rapid-fire consent elections,\u201d wrote Foundation staff attorneys Glenn Taubman and Bill Messenger.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/news\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\/","og_site_name":"National Right to Work Foundation","article_published_time":"2008-03-28T09:49:10+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-09T18:20:22+00:00","author":"Legal Information","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Escrito por":"Legal Information","Tiempo de lectura":"2 minutos"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/news\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/news\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\/"},"author":{"name":"Legal Information","@id":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/#\/schema\/person\/81f7d2108bad2dd3d10068a71f2e3f8f"},"headline":"Employee Rights Group Opposes Federal Bureaucracy\u2019s Devious Proposal to Legitimize Abusive Union Organizing Campaigns","datePublished":"2008-03-28T09:49:10+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-09T18:20:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/news\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\/"},"wordCount":421,"commentCount":0,"articleSection":["News Releases"],"inLanguage":"es","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/news\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/news\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\/","url":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/news\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\/","name":"Employee Rights Group Opposes Federal Bureaucracy\u2019s Devious Proposal to Legitimize Abusive Union Organizing Campaigns - National Right to Work Foundation","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-03-28T09:49:10+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-09T18:20:22+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/#\/schema\/person\/81f7d2108bad2dd3d10068a71f2e3f8f"},"inLanguage":"es","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/news\/employee-rights-group-opposes-federal-bureaucracy-s-devious-proposal-to-legitimize-abusive-union-organizing-campaigns\/"]}]},{"@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"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/#\/schema\/person\/81f7d2108bad2dd3d10068a71f2e3f8f","name":"Legal Information","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"es","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9dd8b017e6d8f6d3a8f6565a48c44ec34db5e7a0837308bad9505aaa64ba93fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9dd8b017e6d8f6d3a8f6565a48c44ec34db5e7a0837308bad9505aaa64ba93fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9dd8b017e6d8f6d3a8f6565a48c44ec34db5e7a0837308bad9505aaa64ba93fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal Information"},"url":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/author\/nrtw\/"}]}},"modified_by":null,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2741","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2741"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2741\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6224,"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2741\/revisions\/6224"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2741"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2741"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nrtw.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2741"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}