Marathon Pundit: Memorial Day weekend NLRB overreach round up

Waukegan Road rat protest

Here is your Memorial Day weekend roundup of NLRB stories.

Union protesters aren't particularly imaginative, which is why the inflatable rat is something I see every few months while driving in the area. The rat on the right was placed outside a Morton Grove housing development earlier this month.

You might be seeing more of them, as Bloomberg explains:

Inflatable rats displayed by labor unions outside a company's offices are a legal form of protest, the U.S. National Labor Relations Board ruled in a case that will expand the scope of worker protests.

The NLRB, which mediates disputes between unions and companies, decided that rat balloons at a company's suppliers or customers, not just the facilities of the business they are protesting, isn’t coercive, according to a statement.

The board ruled 3-1 after a federal court in 2007 reversed a decision from the previous year that a Florida union's mock funeral, using a person dressed as the Grim Reaper, outside an acute-care hospital was unlawfully coercive. The court sent the case back to the board, with orders to review issues including balloon displays as a protest symbol.

The board, controlled by a majority appointed by President Barack Obama, is faulted by Republicans for pro-labor decisions on organizing efforts and worker rights. Republican lawmakers are protesting the board's decision to file a union-retaliation complaint in April against Chicago-based Boeing Co.

The Daily Caller:

Employers and industry organizations are pushing back on labor unions' increased use of pressure and scare tactics in efforts to organize workers and bolster their ranks. They're also pushing Congress to try to stop the unions from "manipulating" the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for their own political agendas. The NLRB has faced extensive criticism from business organizations and companies in recent months for appearing to side with and promote the agenda of Big Labor instead of acting as a neutral arbiter in negotiations.

House Education and Workforce Committee Chairman John Kline, Minnesota Republican, said the NLRB is imbalanced in favor of businesses with Republican presidents and tilts towards Big Labor when Democrats control the White House. Kline thinks the Obama administration has shifted the NLRB much further left than previous Democrats ever have before, though.

"Typically, when it's a Republican administration, Democrats claim that workers' rights are being denied," Kline said during an Education and Workforce subcommittee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) hearing on Thursday. "When it's a Democrat's administration, Republicans [do similar things.] When it's a Republican administration, Democrats call for hearings on board members and I've complained about it. And, now, with this administration, I think we have an outrageous overreach of the Board."

The scare tactics unions use, dubbed "corporate campaigns," are when they try to organize workforces by getting employers to sign "neutrality agreements," which are basically gag orders and legal promises that force an employer to allow organizers on their property to attempt to unionize workers without any company say at all. If companies don't sign the neutrality agreements, unions will often hold large banners outside their businesses, show up at workers' homes after hours, attempt to discredit a company's products or services and try, essentially, to smear the business's reputation until it signs the agreement.

The Detroit News:

Clearly with a Democrat in the White House and particularly one who has big debts to pay to the unions, businesses start at a disadvantage in cases like this. As egregious as the Boeing case is, it doesn't stand alone in absurdity.

In another case, the NLRB sided with a telecom company about relocating a call center from Las Vegas to Florida. But, according to the Wall Street Journal, NLRB Chairwoman Wilma Liebman didn't like that the union wasn't consulted and has suggested new provisions be written to force companies to run their business plans by the unions before taking action.

But wait, there's more. As my colleague Jeffrey Hadden wrote on TheMichiganView.com Tuesday, the NLRB also is trying to thwart state constitutional amendments in Arizona and South Dakota that guarantee workers secret ballots in unionization elections, a direct result of attempts by Democrats in Congress to eliminate this democratic principle on behalf of the unions.

Put simply, no company will ever look at Michigan or other forced unionism states to open their operation if they know that sometime down the road they will be prohibited from moving or expanding elsewhere. Why bother even looking if by virtue of federal bureaucrats all business decisions have to be vetted by the unions?

From the Education and Workforce Committee:

Republican Leaders Reaffirm Urgent Need for Oversight of NLRB

WASHINGTON, D.C. | May 26, 2011 - Today, the Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions, chaired by Rep. Phil Roe, M.D. (R-TN) held a hearing on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and corporate campaigns.

During the hearing, members discussed recent NLRB actions to expand the use of corporate campaigns, as well as the potential impact of the NLRB's recent complaint against The Boeing Company on the nation's workforce. The use of corporate campaigns can have a chilling effect on job creators, as well as threaten the livelihood of workers.

During his opening remarks, Rep. Roe emphasized the urgent need to oversee actions taken by the board. "We must remember the board does not operate in a vacuum," Rep. Roe said. "It is an arm of the federal government, and its decisions govern virtually every private workplace in the nation. That is tremendous power that comes with a great responsibility to act on behalf of the public good. I am concerned the board has jettisoned this responsibility over the last two years in favor of an activist agenda designed to advance the cause of Big Labor over the rights of every day workers."

House Education and the Workforce Chairman John Kline also commented on the need for increased scrutiny of the NLRB’s actions, stating, "In this administration, I think we have an outrageous overreach of the board and I am doing what I can do to provide oversight to that board. It is very powerful. It is powerful beyond what we imagined it could be, and we need to exercise checks and balances."

The Chairman continued, "More to the point raised earlier, this Committee is authorized – indeed obligated – to conduct oversight of the agencies and entities within its purview and the actions those agencies and entities take. And, that is an obligation that we take seriously."

Watch Chairman Kline’s remarks below…

Some leaders in Washington question the need for Congressional oversight of the NLRB, preferring to allow an activist board to proceed unchecked. However, when asked directly by Rep. Roe whether the committee has a responsibility to monitor the NLRB's actions, witness Jonathan Fritts answered affirmatively.

In closing his remarks, Rep. Roe noted, "The committee has pledged to make job creation and American competitiveness its leading priorities. We have a job to do and that includes overseeing the various boards, agencies, and departments within our jurisdiction to ensure they do not undermine the strength of our workforce."

To read testimony and view other documents and video from today's hearing, visit www.edworkforce.house.gov/hearings.