Washington, DC – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a charitable organization that provides free legal assistance to employees nationwide, sent a letter to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) protesting the agency\u2019s decision to threaten lawsuits against state ballot amendments aimed at prohibiting \u2018card check\u2019 organizing drives but not threaten suits against state laws that aid unions. <\/p>\n
The letter, signed by Foundation Legal Director Raymond LaJeunesse, points out that this latest move reveals a troubling pattern of forced unionism favoritism at the NLRB, which is charged with overseeing private sector labor and employment law throughout the country.<\/p>\n
LaJeunesse notes that in numerous other cases where federal statutes preempt state law, the current NLRB has failed to act if asserting federal prerogatives would mean undermining union officials\u2019 special privileges. <\/p>\n
For example, Foundation attorneys currently represent Carol Jean Badertscher, a nurse who was threatened with fines and jail time under California\u2019s draconian \u2018anti-strikebreaker\u2019 law for crossing a union picket line. Although the NLRB\u2019s then General Counsel acknowledged that the California law is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act, the Board declined to declare the anti-strikebreaker law preempted or order notice to California workers about their rights to continue working during a strike.<\/p>\n
However, the Board recently threatened four high-profile lawsuits against Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah for enacting laws designed to prohibit recognition of unions without an NLRB-supervised secret ballot election. <\/p>\n
Those threats highlight a pattern of forced unionism favoritism that further tars the Board\u2019s reputation for evenhandedness. The most notable example of this trend was the recess appointment of Craig Becker, a former SEIU lawyer, to serve on the Board. Despite the involvement of his former employer in several pending cases, Becker has refused to recuse himself and is now poised to issue rulings that could shape American labor law for decades.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Board\u2019s selective interest in asserting federal prerogatives is just the latest example of this Administration\u2019s obvious forced unionism bias,\u201d said Foundation Legal Information Director Patrick Semmens. \u201cThe Obama NLRB rushed to intervene when it meant stopping state attempts to limit coercive card check organizing drives. But in cases where federal preemption would mean striking down state laws that push more workers into unions\u2019 forced dues-paying ranks, the Board is conspicuously silent.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Washington, DC – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a charitable organization that provides free legal assistance to employees nationwide, sent a letter to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) protesting the agency\u2019s decision to threaten lawsuits against state ballot amendments aimed at prohibiting \u2018card check\u2019 organizing drives but not threaten suits against state laws that aid unions. <\/p>\n
The letter, signed by Foundation Legal Director Raymond LaJeunesse, points out that this latest move reveals a troubling pattern of forced unionism favoritism at the NLRB, which is charged with overseeing private sector labor and employment law throughout the country.<\/p>\n
LaJeunesse notes that in numerous other cases where federal statutes preempt state law, the current NLRB has failed to act if asserting federal prerogatives would mean undermining union officials\u2019 special privileges. <\/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-2924","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"yoast_head":"\n