That was the question that several friends of this blog asked when President-Elect Obama officially nominated his Secretary of Labor this past week. The position went to Rep. Hilda Solis, a Democratic Congresswoman from California. On it’s face, the nomination probably isn’t a bad choice for organized labor — Solis has a voting record that is pretty much in-line with what organized labor wants and she will probably continue to press for union-friendly policies at her new job.
But is organized labor really happy with this selection? Yes, in their press releases they are going to praise her, but deep down there is a suspicion that this can not be the person that the unions truly wanted for the job. Let’s briefly review — organized labor spent hundreds of millions of dollars electing a Democratic congress and President. No special interest group did more to elect Democrats. There is a major piece of legislation that could come for a vote in the first 100 days and is going to need as many vocal advocates as it can get because the bill is a complete piece of junk. And considering all of that, the best the Obama team could do was nominate a no-name Congresswoman from California who is not well-known in labor circles?
The Wall Street Journal has some interesting quotes from management side types, both of whom squarely hit it on the head. Peter Kirsanow, a former NLRB member, reaction was that, “She’s clearly not as well-known and doesn’t have a track record… Cabinet picks need to have a certain amount of stature so they’re not buffeted by various interests” and Randy Johnson from the Chamber said, “Because she hasn’t taken a hard stance on labor issues, perhaps she’ll have more of an open door.” I think both of those comments are correct and the fact that a real, hard-core, well-known friend of labor was not selected for this important job has to be disappointing for organized labor, even if they are all smiles on the surface.
