In this issue:
- Union Bailout Update
- Guilt By Association
- UAW On The Ropes
- Union Shell Games
- SEIU Watch, Sticky Fingers, Insight and more…
The bottom of each story contains a link to the individual post on our site.
NOTICE: You can make a PDF of this issue of INK directly from the post. Click here for instructions on how to do so.
http://lrionline.com/easy-way-to-make-our-posts-and-ink-issues-into-pdfs
Labor Relations Insight by Phil Wilson
You have to hand it to Wilma Liebman. In the final two weeks of her tenure as the Chair of the National Labor Relations Board she clearly decided to go out with a bang and not a whimper. On August 25th the NLRB released its final rule regarding the notification of employee rights under the National Labor Relations Act. Just this week the Board overturned 2 important Bush Board decisions and dramatically changed the way units are determined in non-acute healthcare settings.
We obviously live in a very politically polarized time. It was interesting to read Ms. Liebman’s interviews over the weekend as she left the Board, where she focused heavily on this issue. And the fact that the NLRB is issuing decisions and rules in this flurry of activity is exactly what we’ve expected and predicted ever since the current administration took office.
What is different today – and I’m not picking sides, this applies to both sides of the aisle – is the willingness to push the pendulum almost as far as you can go. We saw this in the debt ceiling debate. We’ve seen it with the Boeing complaint. Heck, just yesterday there was an unprecedented tug of war over whether the Speaker of the House would permit the President of the United States to address Congress about his jobs plan. And this recent flurry of activity is just the next step down that slippery slope.
I think this environment is quite dangerous for American business, and that is both a risk and an opportunity. The problem with all of this regulatory activity is that it creates uncertainty at a time when businesses are trying desperately to make good decisions. This uncertainty can cause bad decisions, but usually it just causes paralysis. And I think that is what many companies are experiencing today. I think one of the main reasons companies aren’t hiring or investing the cash they have is they just have no idea what is coming around the corner. That is the danger.
But there is also opportunity. If you’ve never read Economics in One Lesson I can summarize it for you in a sentence. Economics is basically the law of unintended consequences. When our government acts there is the direct action, but then there are thousands of other reactions, like ripples from a stone thrown into a pond. Often those reactions not only counter-act the original event, but many times they completely reverse the intended consequence.
Make no mistake. The intention of the notice posting rulemaking is to increase the number of union organizing attempts against companies across the United States. However, there will be many unintended consequences of the NLRB’s rulemaking. As frustrating as it will be for employers to post a road-map for organizing in their break room, this rule also gives companies a unique opportunity to invest in their direct relationship with employees. It provides a reason to reaffirm your commitment to creating a great place to work.
Ultimately that is the opportunity. Your company can turn this onslaught of administrative activity into a chance to reinforce your direct relationship with your employees. That is not what unions expect, but it may be just the unintended consequence you need.
**********
Union Bailout Update
Washington agencies continue to roll out regulations and rules in favor of their Big Labor patrons. The NLRB has been particularly busy. In additional to finalizing the “organizing rights” posting rule, the board also overturned two decisions, making it more difficult for employees to get rid of a union they no longer want. First to be overturned was the 2007 Dana Corp decision. In Dana Corp, if an employer recognized a union by “show of interest” alone (in other words, without giving employees the chance to vote on representation), an immediate appeal by at least 30% of the employees (or a rival union) could force the issue to an election. In overturning this decision, the board said the union should be able to operate for a “reasonable period of time” before the employees were allowed the opportunity to vote it out. The board defined the time period as a minimum of 6 months, and up to a year, depending on the circumstances.
Somewhat parallel to Dana was the 2002 MV Transportation decision, which allowed a union’s status to be challenged by 30% of the employees (or again, a rival union) at the time a business changed ownership. Just as in the case above, the board reversed this decision, and again imposed a 6-month to 1-year period before the union’s status could be challenged.
The board also issued its ruling in the Specialty Healthcare case, ruling to allow sub-units to be recognized as “appropriate units” in non-acute health care facilities. Former board Chairman Peter Schaumber summed up the mischief inherent in this gambit earlier this year:
A proliferation of small units presents the specter of an unending series of union organizing campaigns, NLRB proceedings, and the attendant litigation costs and disruption to the employer’s operations. Moreover, fragmentation of the workforce does not enhance collective bargaining, it undermines it. As the Board has recognized, it can give rise to conflicts of interest and dissatisfaction among constituent groups, impose the time and expense of continuous and repetitious bargaining, and lead to wage whipsawing, more frequent strikes, work stoppages and jurisdictional disputes. … That is why the NLRB, since its inception, has sought to avoid the proliferation of bargaining units and it is why the National Labor Relations Act specifically states that the extent to which the union has succeeded in organizing employees shall not be controlling in determining the appropriate unit….
Wilma Liebman
As mentioned above, former NLRB Chairwoman Wilma Liebman as completed her term and retired, leaving 3 members on the board, and Mark Pearce the new chairman. According to the New York Times, Liebman defended the board’s actions as being misunderstood, stating “The perception of this agency as doing radical things is mystifying to me.”
Over at the DOL’s Office of Labor Management Standards (OLMS), an interesting twist is being added to the newly proposed OLMS reporting rules. John Lund, head of the OLMS, plans to change the definition of the term “employer” as it exists in the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act to exclude labor unions, thereby shrouding union activities in a yet deeper veil of secrecy. BigGovernment.com writer Don Loos sums up the motive succinctly:
Why the change? Because John Lund wants to exclude himself and other union labor consultants from the onerous new “Employer” and “Labor Consultants” regulations that DOL is currently proposing. If union bosses were covered by the ‘Employer’ definition, then Big Labor law firms like the NEA’s Bredhoff & Kaiser would be required to file the new reports in order to comply with its new regulations. This Employer definition change will effectively eliminate union bosses from ever having to disclose timely details of their payments to Justice for Janitors, Interfaith Worker Justice, or any other Big Labor front groups participating in their labor persuader activities.
The next big Big Labor/Government brawl will likely begin in September as the battle over the FAA resumes. The reauthorization bill promoted by Republicans includes provisions to overturn the recent National Mediation Board decision that made it easier to unionize in the airline industry. Democrats stood against the measure, even forcing a shut down of the agency, which was only temporarily resolved. Whether Democrats will stand firm in the midst of the continued pressure of the budget battle remains to be seen.
TN State Rep. Gary Moore
On the union side, the AFL-CIO announced an effort to ramp up its political machinations by forming a super PAC as a way to funnel more money into politics, particularly at the state level. Trumka touted in a recent video, “I have conversations every day with someone in the White House or in the administration. Every day.” It appears this isn’t enough, and he’d like to make similar comments about all state capitols as well.
Finally, an interesting (and brazen) twist on the state level. Tennessee State Representative Gary Moore has taken the post of president of the Tennessee AFL-CIO labor council. Although Moore claims he can avoid any conflicts of interest, State Republican Chairman Chris Devaney doesn’t buy it. “He needs to figure out if he wants to represent his district or represent the AFL-CIO.”
**********
Guilt By Association
It doesn’t matter that your franchise restaurants have an employee base running 90 percent Latino. If you also happen to be somehow connected to Station Casinos – well then, you are anti-Latino!
So discovered Frank Schreck when union members stationed themselves outside his Nevada Subway to pass out leaflets denouncing him as such. Schreck is a member of a law firm that represents the casino, and the union decided to besmirch this small businessman’s name in an attempt to apply pressure to the casino. Culinary union members spent 2 hours disrupting business and passing out flyers in front of Schreck’s stores.
Lori Nelson, corporate communications director at Station Casinos, said the union’s efforts were “yet another example of the strong-arm tactics being used by the Culinary union as part of their continued harassment of our company.”
**********
Support Effort Wasted
In the middle of August, UNITE HERE announced it was rallying to support the CWA in their strike against Verizon. UNITE HERE offered to:
• adopt local Verizon stores
• coordinate picket support
• provide food trucks at major city picket lines
• raise money for the strike fund
One more example of wasted effort and squandered resources of hard-working dues payers, for a union not their own.
An earlier post by Richard Epstein prognosticated that the strike would shortly end with CWA going back to work with no contract, a prediction that has since come true. In his latest post on the events, he opines that the end of the strike coupled with the fallacious board action against Boeing by NLRB general counsel Lafe Solomon may weaken President Obama’s ability to continue to bolster Big Labor.
**********
Poster-Proof Your Company!
As you probably know by now, Aug 25th the NLRB released their final rule regarding the placement of a new required poster which provides a “roadmap” for your employees to organize a union. Just today we provided a webinar explaining the final rule, but more importantly outlining a strategy to Poster Proof your company against the repercussions of this posting.
We are providing a FREE counter-posting designed to put up next to the NLRB-required poster, and have put together some hugely discounted packages on the few key tools required to inoculate your employees against union encroachment.
Get your FREE poster, and check out these specials now at:
http://lrionline.com/poster-proof
PS. If you missed the webinar, go to the page below to register and we’ll notify you when we have the recording posted:
http://lrionline.com/nlrb-posting-rules
**********
SEIU Watch
The SEIU has had such a busy couple of weeks, we’re just going to bullet point the list of activities – dig in for yourself to see the details!
• In San Francisco, an SEIU mob attacked shopping mall security guards (video).
• An SEIU mob of about 50 protestors took over a bank headquarters in Pasadena, CA. (video).
• The union hired a marketing firm to launch a smear campaign against a Redding, CA, hospital using phone calls and mailed flyers, prompting the hospital to consider legal action.
• SEIU 1199 organized employees at St. Mary’s Hospital for Children in Bayside, NY.
• A hospital in Los Angeles had to secure a restraining order to prevent an illegal strike threatened by SEIU Healthcare West. The threat alone cost the hospital a $90,000 non-refundable deposit on a $600,000 tab for replacement workers.
• SEIU Trustee Dave Regan liquated a $4.1 million SEIU-UHW strike fund days before the trusteeship ended.
• Sodexo was cleared by United States District Judge Claude Hilton to file its extortion suit against SEIU under the RICO act.
• County government workers in San Diego voted to leave SEIU Local 221 and join the independent Association of San Diego County Employees (ASDCE)
• For the fourth time in recent weeks, employees of a Canadian hospital voted to leave the SEIU
Whew! That’s a mouthful. SEIU is on a roll.
**********
UAW On The Ropes
It appears the UAW just plain doesn’t see the handwriting on the wall. American Axle announced about a month ago that it will close a plant in Detroit, MI, because union members there failed to agree to wage cuts. That closure will put an end to 300 jobs. Not to be deterred, UAW members failed to ratify a contract in a New York plant in mid-August, causing the company to announce the closure in February of that plant – putting another 100 UAW workers on the street.
Never mind these repercussions, and never mind the UAW’s attempts to “talk nice” to foreign automakers it is trying to organize – Bob King, UAW president, is adamant about pursuing a grievance against Ford that could lead to yet another strike. The grievance is based on a dubious claim related to management rights (which Ford retains in the contract), but one UAW negotiator reveals what may behind the maneuver:
“Gary Walkowicz, a UAW bargaining committeeman at the Ford Rouge assembly plant in suburban Detroit, said he expects King to settle the grievance as part of contract negotiations to make Ford’s offer to workers look more generous than it really is.”
So it is most likely a ruse to hide the fact that the UAW really can’t do that much for its members any more.
**********
Union Shell Games
In addition to Bob King’s “grievance gambit” discussed in the prior post/article, other unions are looking for ways to hide the fact that they are not able to achieve for their members at the bargaining table what they originally promised they would. In this recent SEIU example, it appears the union staged a “fake fight” with a hospital, so it could appear that SEIU Healthcare Michigan president Marge Faville swooped in and solved the situation, taking attention away from the “bad deal” that the SEIU got for hospital employees.
The SEIU then pressed employees to ratify the deal – without letting them actually see it!
**********
Teamsters Throw Salt in the Wound
Struggling Republic Airways lost $55 million in the first quarter of this year, and developed a $120 million plan to restructure the finances of part of its business, Frontier Airlines. The restructure included concessions from the Frontier Airline Pilots Association, which they agreed to.
However, the Teamsters took the issue to court, filing a lawsuit asking the U.S. District Court in Denver to nullify the agreement, and to file an injunction forcing Frontier and Republic to deal only with the Teamsters, who won representation in June for all of Republic’s pilot groups. The Teamsters contend that Frontier and Republic Airways conspired to interfere with the election in exchange for FAPA agreeing to the concessions.
**********
Social Media Spotlight
The NLRB recently summarized its position on employee use of social media. A recent post by labor attorney Robin E. Shea neatly summarizes the NLRB summary.
Here’s the gist (quoting HR Morning’s presentation of the post):
Protected activity:
- Employee of non-profit was scheduled for a meeting with her executive director to discuss a dispute about her job performance. She posted about it on Facebook and got feedback from her co-workers.
- Emergency medical technician was asked by her supervisor to respond to customer complaint and was denied a request for union representation. EMT posted negative comments about her supervisor on Facebook, received responses from her co-workers, and called her supervisor a “scumbag.”
- Car salesman posted on Facebook photos and criticism of food offered by dealership at sales event, saying that food was too chintzy for their clientele and would adversely affect sales commissions. Co-workers commented their agreement.
- Restaurant employees posted on Facebook comments about employer’s allegedly improper tax withholding practices, and one employee said employer was “[s]uch an as**ole.”
Not protected:
- Newspaper reporter tweeted (on Twitter, duh) criticisms of his copy editors and was instructed to stop it. He did, but he continued to tweet about local homicides and sexually oriented topics. Finally, he tweeted a criticism of a local television station, drawing a complaint from the TV station to the newspaper. Presumably the criticisms of the copy editors might have been protected, but there was no indication that the newspaper had terminated him for that. The other tweets were not about terms and conditions of his employment, and he didn’t seek to involve other employees.
- Bartender griped to a relative on Facebook about employer’s tipping policy, calling customers “rednecks,” and saying he hoped they would choke on glass as they drove home drunk.
- Employee criticized employer on Facebook wall of her Senator but no one else, and was not seeking to involve other employees.
- Employee who worked in program for people with mental health problems posted on Facebook about alleged mental illnesses of the clients, saying that it felt “spooky” being alone in mental institution, that a client “was cracking her up,” and making similar comments. The only “friends” who responded were not co-workers.
- Retail employee posted on Facebook about management “tyranny” and called his assistant manager an obscene name, and said that a lot of employees were ready to quit. Although he received generally supportive comments from co-workers (like “hang in there”), the Board’s regional office found that it was an “individual gripe.”
Not protected, and illegal:
- Union business agent and three organizers went to worksite of non-union employer and began interrogating workers as to whether they were legally authorized to work in the United States, and threatening to call immigration and have the employees deported.
One of the union representatives videotaped the event, and an edited version was posted on YouTube and Facebook.
The regional office found that the Union unlawfully interfered with the employees’ rights by interrogation, threats, and coercion, and also interfered with the rights of other employees who might have seen the video on the internet.
**********
One Tired Salmon!
Talk about swimming upstream – Iron Workers General President pledged to “double our market share and double our union within the next 10 years.”
The comments were delivered at the 42nd Iron Workers Convention in Chicago, held Aug. 15-19. Wise also lauded such job-crippling measures as the Davis-Bacon Act, and advocated expansion of Project Labor Agreements.
**********
Sticky Fingers
Current charges or sentences of embezzling union officials:
| Perry Taylor | AFSCME | $4,624 |
| Joseph Gonzales Jr | IGUA | $13,800 |
| Robin Mills | IEBW | $49,288 |
| Darrell Whitehouse | USW | $6,350 |
http://www.nlpc.org/union-corruption-update
**********
Labor Relations INK is published semi-weekly and is edited by Labor Relations Institute, Inc. Feel free to pass this newsletter on to anyone you think might enjoy it. New subscribers can sign up by visiting:
http://lrionline.com/free-stuff/newsletter-signup/
If you use content from this newsletter please attribute it to Labor Relations Institute and include our website address:
Contributing editors for this issue: Phillip Wilson, Greg Kittinger, Nancy Jowske and Shaun Fanning
You are receiving this email because you subscribed to receive our labor relations newsletters and updates. You can manage your email preferences by clicking the link at the bottom of any of our email communications.
NOTE: if you are using Internet Explorer v. 6, read the text version, as the html will not load properly in IE6. We recommend upgrading to IE7.
