Stephen Cabot's Blog | Labor Relations

TAG | corporate america

From the desk of Steve Cabot:

With his Congressional rubber stamp privileges revoked by the decisive loss of the House of Representatives last November, President Obama continues to use the rule-making and regulatory powers of the Executive Branch to work his will on employers.  He seems emboldened by the push-back from the American people, and is doubling down on his efforts to “transform” the country in his remaining time in office.

Previously, we described how the Democrat-dominated NLRB recently proposed rules which would significantly impact management’s ability to makes its case leading up to a union ratification election. Now it’s the Department of Labor which has stepped in to influence and intimidate employers who seek advice from outside attorneys and consultants (officially known as “persuaders”) as they prepare for these elections.

Specifically, the DOL has proposed a rule related to the reporting requirements under Section 203 of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, which would broaden “advice” to mean any “oral or written recommendation regarding a decision or course of conduct.” The rule stipulates that both the company and its consultants must open their books to report any of the newly-covered activities – and, even more intrusively, the details of any compensation involved.

As usual, the devil is in the details, as found in the language of the rule:

“For example, persuader activities may additionally include: Training or directing supervisors and other management representatives to engage in persuader activity; establishing anti-union committees composed of employees; planning employee meetings; deciding which employees to target for persuader activity or discipline; creating employer policies and practices designed to prevent organizing; and determining the timing and sequencing of persuader tactics and strategies.”

The rule goes on to state that even “union avoidance” seminars and conferences offered by lawyers or labor consultants to employers will constitute “reportable persuader activity.”  The proposed rule was  published on June 21, 2011, in the Federal Register. Public comments can submitted until August 22, 2011.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Jun/11

24

A NEW THREAT TO CORPORATE AMERICA

From the Desk of Steve Cabot:

Having failed to get congress to pass the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), organized labor is now benefitting from proposed new rules issued by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The new rules will ease the way for organized labor to win union elections by dramatically truncating the period of time from petition to election. It currently takes an average of 57 days from petition to election; under the new rules that period would be reduced to from 10 to 21 days. Of course, union organizers often spend months convincing employees to vote for unionization, prior to the filing of a petition. Now, the newly imposed brief interregnum will significantly curtail a company’s ability to educate employees about the disadvantages of unionization.

As if that were not sufficiently injurious to Corporate America, the NLRB rules would also permit the electronic filing of election petitions, defer litigation about voter eligibility until after an election, require employers to provide a union with the phone numbers and e-mail addresses of all employees prior to an election, consolidate all litigious matters into a single post-election appeals action in order to eliminate individual actions that could delay an election.

One can only speculate what additional pro-union rules and regulations the NLRB may issue in the coming months. Certainly issues of wages and benefits will be an enticing subject for the NLRB ideologues to consider.

Corporate America has, thus far, been too complacent, believing that because the number of union members has decreased over the years that unions have been rendered ineffectual. In fact, unions are vigorously preparing for an aggressive assault on Corporate America, and its chief advocate and front-line ally is the NLRB, which is proposing a number of radical threats to Corporate America that should not be ignored.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Apr/11

22

NLRB ATTACKS RIGHT-TO-WORK STATES

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

The National Labor Relations Board has further evidenced its pro-union advocacy by attempting to prevent Boeing from opening a manufacturing facility in South Carolina, a right-to-work state.
Having endured numerous strikes against its manufacturing facility in Washington, including a 58 day strike in 2008 that cost the company $1.8 billion, Boeing management decided to build its new 787 Dreamliner in South Carolina. The proposed new facility would generate 1,000 new jobs and bring a $2 billion investment to the state..
The NLRB, however, filed a complaint against Boeing, alleging that Boeing is attempting to violate labor law in retaliation for past strikes against the company. The Board wants Boeing to stay in Washington. It’s no surprise that the International Association of Machinists District 571, which represents Boeing workers, declared the ruling “a victory for all American workers.”
Yet, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham called it “one of the worst cases of unelected bureaucrats doing the bidding of special interest groups that I’ve ever seen.”
The NLRB is effectively attempting to abrogate the rights of Corporate America by eliminating its ability to decide where it wants to do business. It is also sabotaging the economic viability of twenty-two right-to-work states, which have been providing more new jobs than states which cater to unions and their often extortionate demands.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

Though Republican congressional representatives have expressed their displeasure at the overtly pro-union rules and regulations issued by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), they failed to cut the Board’s budget.
The vigorously negotiated budget deal that was recently agreed upon has exempted the NLRB from the budget cutter’s scalpel, thus leaving intact a major obstacle to the economic well-being of Corporate America. There had been vigorous lobbying to cut the Board’s budget, but union lobbyists may have outspent their opponents, leaving former union attorney Craig Becker to direct the NLRB’s actions in accordance with the wishes of organized labor.
The Wall Street Journal had reported earlier this year that the GOP intended to cut the Board’s annual budget by $50 million, which would have amounted to 1/5 of its overall budget.
Not only has the proposed budget cut not materialized, but the Board has actually experienced an increase in funding. The result, unfortunately, will be that that Board will be energized by the unfulfilled threats of its opponents and its increased budget; it will continue on its pro-union, anti-management war path. Its actions, no doubt, will prove pernicious to the economic growth of the country.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Feb/11

11

THE COMING SEIU TSUNAMI

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

According to an article in The Wall Street Journal (www.wsj.com), the Service Employees International Union, which presently has 2 million members, intends to launch a major offensive against corporate America that will “peak in the summer of 2012.”

The Union intends to recruit new members to its ranks in 10 to 15 major American cities, including Cleveland, Milwaukee, Miami, and Detroit. Its recruitment efforts will take place at political primary events, town hall meetings, and other gatherings. No doubt, its focus will be at Democratic Party events, for the SEIU is a stalwart contributor to Democratic candidates. In the last presidential election, the SEIU spent $70 million! It is reportedly prepared to spend tens of millions of dollars on its aggressive new recruitment efforts.

Many of its members are public sector workers who will receive inordinately large pensions upon their retirement, which will further contribute to the near bankruptcy of states. The Union, obviously, hopes to defeat any legislative measures that will curtail the size of those tax-payer funded pensions. Hence, its forthcoming efforts to beef up its membership rolls and deliver the maximum number of votes to its Democratic allies in 2012.

It is essential that both legislators and Corporate America prepare effective survival strategies to defeat the deleterious efforts of the SEIU. If not, public service pensions will indeed bankrupt one state after another leading to financial devastation throughout the land.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has threatened to sue four states for ensuring that workers can enjoy a basic democratic right to cast secret ballots when it come s to the possibility of unionization. The four states, South Dakota, South Carolina, Arizona, and Utah, have mandated the use of secret ballots in union elections.

The NLRB has made the Alice-in-Wonderland assertion that secret ballots violate federal law. Though Congress has refused to pass the Employee Free Choice Act that would have permitted unions to coerce workers into signing “card checks” to ensure union representation, the NLRB has repeatedly looked for opportunities to present unions with opportunities to impose the use of “card checks” on workers, who may not want to join a union.

Indeed, the most effective tactic that workers have against forced unionization is the secret ballot. No union organizer gets to coerce, embarrass, or intimidate a worker to join a union when the workers’ preferences are made oblique by casting secret, anonymous ballots.

We back the efforts of Minnesota Republican Representative John Kline to amend the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) with the passage of the Secret Ballot Protection Act. While the Republican dominated House of Representatives very well may pass the amendment, the Democrats in the Senate will not pass it. Corporate America, therefore, will have to wait until the election of 2012 to be delivered from the high-handed, pro-union actions of the NLRB. Meanwhile, it is essential that corporations put in place survival strategies that prevent labor relations problems before they arise.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

While the private sector has lost 8-million jobs since 2008, the public sector has added 590,000 jobs during that same period. In addition, federal employees, on average, receive twice the salary and benefits that comparable private sector employees receive.

Public sector unions and congress are the keys that unlocked this Pandora’s box of economic irrationality. Imagine a circle comprising public sector unions, public sector employees, and Democratic members of congress. Each benefits the other. Democratic representatives vote to increase the wages and benefits of public sector employees, and their unions provide the necessary funds for re-election campaigns. Once re-elected, those representatives vote for higher wages and increased benefits for the union members who contributed to their election victories. And so it goes, on and on.

The result, of course, is ever higher deficits, spiraling into the stratosphere of economic irrationality.

And the disaster is not just confined to the federal deficit. The disease has infected state and municipal budgets across the country as well. According to recent estimates, state and city governments have inflated employee benefit liabilities in excess of $3-trillon!

Now with the NLRB firmly in the hands of pro-union ideologues, an agenda is coming into focus of an effort to increase the wages and benefits of private sector employees to match those of government employees. And the NLRB will attempt to do so by making private sector unions, such as the AFL-CIO and SEIU, as powerful as their public sector counterparts. It isn’t enough that public sector unions have egregiously contributed to the possible bankruptcy of governments, their private sector counterparts now want to inject that same virus into the body of Corporate America.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Nov/10

12

ORGANIZE TODAY, WIN TOMORROW?

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

For several months, I have been writing that the NLRB has been looking for ways to do an end run around the mis-named Employee Free Choice Act. Ideologically disposed to providing whatever support it can to unions, the NLRB’s latest intention is to endorse quickie elections to hasten union representation.
The time from petition to election usually takes 38 days. However, Mark Pearce, a Board member, would like to shorten that period of time to between five and ten days, which is what exists in Canada.
In order for employers to present their side of the unionization story, to educate their employees to what they will be losing if they vote for union representation, they need sufficient time to communicate facts and concepts to employees. And because union organizers usually operate in secret, employers will not know that their employees have been the targets of union propaganda until a petition has been filed. Five to ten days will hardly be adequate time for management to present its case. After all, the union organizers may have been propagandizing workers for weeks, if not months.
A quickie election is indeed an end round around the dormant Employee Free Choice Act. Instead of card checks, union authorization cards will lead to petitions which will lead to quickie elections. Five days later, a union will be in place. Say hello to the Employee Free Choice Act in disguise. It is, therefore, essential that Corporate America pro-actively develop strategies for defeating such scenarios. And the time for doing so is Now!

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Nov/10

5

UNIONS READY FOR A BIG TAKEOFF

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

While the political and ideological composition of Congress was dramatically altered by the election on Tuesday, the composition of the National Mediation Board remains the same. It is decidedly pro-union and dominated by President Obama’s ideological allies

The Board had recently made it easier for unions to organize air carriers by altering a rule of the Railway Labor Act so that fewer workers need to vote in favor of union representation than had been previously required.

And while Delta Airlines employees wisely rejected union representation after doing a side-by-side comparison of union and non-union benefits. (Unionized employees would have received lower salaries than non-unionized employees!).
Unions, however, have not been discouraged by the employees’ rejection of unionization at Delta. In fact, organizing drives at numerous small regional carriers have begun, and the momentum of those efforts is rapidly increasing, fueled by the NMB’s decision to encourage such actions.
A portentous example is one that has occurred at small Allegiant Airlines, where a majority of nonunion flight attendants have petitioned the National Mediation Board for an election to choose representation by the Transport Workers Union of America (TWUA).
That is just one of many organizing drives that have begun and will continue over the next two years. While Corporate America has won a major battle by electing many Republicans to Congress, it still has a war to win, if it’s going to change the pro-union agenda that currently exists in the Obama Administration. The election of 2012 could be the one that gives Corporate America a conclusive victory.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Oct/10

29

THE NLRB’S PRO-UNION STRATEGY

From the desk of Stephen Cabot

The presidency of Barack Obama has produced a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that is decidedly pro-union and anti-business. The president’s appointees to the Board have made their ideological positions well known, and those positions are the reverse of what existed under President George W. Bush. The most vociferous advocate for organized labor on the Board is Craig Becker, but there are others who are equally committed to giving every possible benefit to unions. And together, they are a powerful majority who share the same goals: to increase union membership.
Corporate America can now expect a powerful barrage of NLRB actions that will enhance the ability of unions to win battles and enlist workers in the army of organized labor. The NLRB will make it increasingly difficult for companies to educate workers against the potential injuries associated with unionization; companies will find it increasingly difficult to decertify unions; they will have to accept electronic voting instead of secret paper ballot voting. And more: unions have now been granted the right to hoist and display anti-business banners that can intimidate management not only at organizing targets, but also at companies that do business with the those being targeted by organizers. And it’s not just banners: businesses can be harassed by noisy demonstrators carrying loudspeakers, blowing horns and whistles, and shouting at passersby. And most insidiously, the Board is soon expected to permit workers to use their employers’ computers to send pro-union e-mails to their colleagues. In effect, companies will no longer have the right to restrict employee use of company-owned computers. It will be a computer virus that no spyware will be able to prevent.

The NLRB is obviously creating a Brave New World for union organizers. And Corporate America will be the unfortunate victim. It is, therefore, essential that management immediately put in place proactive labor relations survival strategies. Not to do so will prove self-destructive. One should not wait for the enemy to attack; one should have defense mechanisms in place to prevent those attacks from ever succeeding. Aggressive organizers are now drawing up plans to rouse one’s workers to bite the hands that feed them!

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Older posts >>

Disclaimer: Although this blog may be helpful in informing clients and others who have an interest in labor relations issues, it is not intended to be legal advice. The thoughts offered in this space refer to complex matters, and the significance of them – i.e. how they might apply (or not) to any particular individual or organization – may vary considerably. Readers should not rely on the information or opinions expressed in this blog as a substitute for competent legal or consultative advice specific to their circumstances.