Labor Relations INK   In this issue:

• Union Bailout Update
• Union Membership Slide Continues
• Shoes Don’t Fit?
• Social Media Spotlight, Sticky Fingers and more…

Union Bailout Update First the latest moves from the pro-union contingent of the nation’s lawmakers. New York handed union organizers in their state a new billy club with a new “Wage Theft Prevention Act,” which imposes stringent notice requirements and enhances penalties for violations of the wage-hour laws. At the federal level, the NLRB just got extremely creative by deciding that an employer violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act for terminating an employee before she engaged in protected “concerted activity.” The usual NLRB dissenter, Brian Hayes, said of the Paraxel Industries, LLC, 356 NLRB No. 82 decision,

“I note that finding a Sec. 8(a)(1) motivational discharge violation in the absence of any actual concerted activity is unprecedented, and, at the very least, in tension with Meyers Industries, supra. I have serious reservations about this finding and the potential breadth of its application in future cases.”

The Obama administration also got creative, using a new EPA standard to force independent truckers into the Teamsters union. The new “green” emissions standards will be required to enter some of the country’s busiest ports, which many independent truckers rely on for a large share of their business. The teamsters HATE independent truckers because they can’t unionize contractors, so the regulations force the owner/drivers into a company in order to comply. Obama chimed in by resubmitting the appointment of Craig Becker to the NLRB for a full 5-year term that would end in December of 2014. He couldn’t get his original appointment through Congress and had to resort to a recess appointment. With the newly remodeled Congress, this one is not likely to go much further. If not confirmed, his current term will expire in December of this year. Senators Mike Enzi (R-WY) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) sent a letter to the President asking him to rescind the nomination, stating:

“We were disappointed that you chose to put Mr. Becker on the Board by recess appointment even after the Senate voted against advancing his nomination… After examination of his writings and a hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, the Senate opposed his confirmation because of his record of supporting an expanded role for the NLRB beyond current law without Congressional authorization and his multiple conflicts-of-interest.”

On the pro-business side, the four states threatened by the NLRB to sue to declare their recently passed secret ballot protection laws unconstitutional, shook their fists and said, “Go ahead, make my day!” A letter signed by the four state Attorneys General said in part, “If you choose to proceed with the lawsuits described in your January 13 letters, we will, of course, vigorously defend our laws,” and

“We reject your demand to ‘stipulate to the unconstitutionality’ of these amendments. These state laws protect long existing federal rights, and we will vigorously defend any legal attack upon them. That the NLRB would use its resources to sue our States for constitutionally guaranteeing the right to vote by a secret ballot is extraordinary, and we urge you to reconsider your decision.”

Senator Jim DeMint (R – SC) got into the act by reintroducing the Secret Ballot Protection Act, referencing the NLRB/States ruckus in a press release. It is highly unlikely the bill will go any farther than it has in the past, as it would take 13 Democrats to break ranks to get past cloture in the Senate. Finally, in an ironic decision out of the usually labor-friendly state of California, an appellate court reversed a lower court’s ruling and declared two state statutes protecting labor handbilling and picketing on private property to be unconstitutional when similar protections are not allowed for other speech. The court declared that “the impact of the statutes is to discriminate,” and that “the statutes select which views the state is willing to have discussed and debated.” ********** Union Membership Slide Continues As we predicted, last year saw the union rosters decline, maintaining the current downward slide in membership. Private sector membership in 2010 came in at 6.9%, down from 2009’s 7.2%. Even with Big Labor’s push into the public sector, representing 36.2% of workers there, the overall total for the entire workforce declined from 12.3% in 2009 to 11.9% in 2010. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics news release Jan. 21, 2011. *********

Shoes Don’t Fit?

Harper’s magazine owner John MacArthur, a typical liberal defender of unions, doesn’t seem to see things quite the same when his own employees decide to seek union representation. MacArthur charged that the editors and assistant editors of his staff didn’t qualify to organize, since they were “management.” When the shoe’s on the other foot, perhaps it’s not so comfortable after all. ********** Social Media Spotlight:  Sophistication in On-Line Organizing The New Organizing Institute Education Fund is putting on a 2-day conference in Washington, D.C., “Analytics And Optimization Training.” To qualify for the event, you need a year under your belt in on-line organizing, and the focus is heavy on metrics and measurement. The description for the event says,

21st-century organizing isn’t just about people, it’s about data. Gathering good data and knowing how to use it helps you evaluate your work, identify new opportunities, and organize better. NOIEF is bringing together experts from MoveOn, Analyst Institute and other major organizations to lead an in-depth, two-day training covering statistics, experimental design, optimization, data analysis, and everything else you’ll need to make sure you’re running the best campaigns you can.

The NOI web site has a host of free organizing training tools and lessons, including video, workbooks, and trainers references for learning and teaching organizing. **********

Big Labor Says, “Focus On Emotion, Not Facts”

For going on 30 years, LRI has been coaching our clients that the key to an effective counter-organizing strategy is to focus on the facts, and take the emotion out of the campaign. The reasons are obvious – union organizing tactics rely almost exclusively on ignoring reality, and agitating employees over perceived “injustices,” to incite them to vote from a purely emotional response. Big Labor knows that their cause shrivels under the scrutiny of facts, and admonishes labor activists to use the smoky haze of emotion to cloud the facts of their issues. Starting in Indiana, in the fight over a recently proposed Right To Work law, the Indiana Chamber of Commerce released a study indicating that such a law would increase average per capita income and create jobs. Indiana AFL-CIO President said the study was “misleading and distorted,” and that Indiana workers would face lower wages, worse benefits and less effective workplace-safety regulations. Ken Brinegar, the President of the local Chamber, observed, “Actually, no facts were mentioned at all in the union reply; that’s because the union argument is strictly an emotional one.” Decrying the lost battle over the Employee Free Choice Act, and now the losing debate over public-employee unions, a labor journalist comments, “by saying unions were necessary for a good economy, unions were in effect defending their right to exist. The debate became about unions and not about the awful intimidation tactics of the boss.” Reading between the lines, it is obvious that the strategy being promoted is to steer away from facts, away from any attempt to justify the need or value of unions, and to instead create some “evil entity” to target, stylize the arguments in emotional terms, and push the pedal to the metal:

The response to Waiting for Superman was a good example. Teachers unions allowed themselves to get into a debate about whether or not teachers unions were a good thing. This is not the debate organized labor wants to be having, since every person has a personal anecdote of a bad teacher or nightmare experience at the DMV. Instead, unions should have pointed out that the people advocating for market based principles of education reform did not represent real people, but were instead funded by hedge funds and billionaires like Bill Gates (see this must-read piece by Joanne Barkan in Dissent magazine on the billionaries [sic] funding “education reform” messages). Focusing on the so called “grassroots credibility” of the messengers delivering these attacks instead of on teachers unions would have put anti-union forces on the defensive instead of organized labor.

Ah yes, don’t focus on the facts of the argument, focus on the messenger (or other diversion strategy). Another notable quote:

Instead of trying to counter the message, the labor movement should instead use guerilla journalism tactics to take out the messenger. We should point out very clearly that the people attacking unions are liars and they are bought off by industries that stand to gain from attacking unions.

For those of us in the trenches of union organizing, there’s nothing new here. **********

Mafia Sting Nabs Union Leaders

When federal officials closed the net on 127 mob members in what FBI officials are calling the largest roundup of La Cosa Nostra figures, the International Longshoreman Association (ILA) was heavily represented. Among the indicted were Albert Cernadas, former president ILA Local 1235 and former ILA VP; Nunzio LaGrasso, who is VP of ILA Local 1478 and ILA Representative; Thomas Leonardis, the president of ILA Local 1235; Robert Ruiz, the delegate of ILA Local 1235 and an ILA representative, and Vincent Aulisi, former president of ILA Local 1235; and ILA members Patrick Cicalese, Robert Moreno, and Manuel Salgado. Included among the mob families hit by the raid were the New Jersey Decavalcante family, all five New York crime families — the Colombo, Gambino, Genovese, Bonanno and Luchese families — and the New England Patriarca family. New Jersey U.S. Attorney Paul J. Fishman commented, “Workers should be free to pursue an honest living without being worried that their own union representatives will shake them down.” *********** Insider View of Union Salting If you want to get a union’s perspective on the tactics and strategy behind salting employers, head over to this site managed by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 363 and study up! If you are wondering what “salting” means, let’s read it right from the site:

“ ’Salting’ is the deliberate act of getting a job at a specific workplace with the intent to organize a union. Most union campaigns start with a lone individual or small group of individuals with no union experience deciding to organize a union from scratch. Sometimes, a union campaign can be strengthened if you know of a friend with union organizing experience. By applying for open positions at your workplace, your friend can secretly help you organize your workplace. There are other circumstances where salting is used.”

Here are some of the tactics encouraged of salts:

• If possible, get a list of all employees, or make one of your own. If you can, try to include home addresses and telephone numbers. • Write down useful information about your co-workers-their jobs, their skill level, their attitude toward management, their Union history and so on. • Write notes on everything that happens that might be important-things people say about the job or the company, disciplinary actions, problems that come up at work, health and safety issues and so on.

Under “taking notes” about employees, salts are told, “If you can’t get anything else, write down vehicle license number.” It has been demonstrated before that unions will illegally access Department of Motor Vehicle records and use license numbers to obtain other information about employees. ********** This Is Democracy? Big Labor’s true colors always seem to come out when their organizations go through internal campaigns and elections. In this case, James Hoffa and the Teamsters are under the microscope for their unscrupulous actions leading up to this fall’s elections. It appears Jimmy and friends have been using pension fund money, funded by union dues, to bribe those who have attempted to break away from the Hoffa slate, and either run in opposition or support those who do. Interestingly, court-appointed IBT Election Supervisor Richard Mark found that the complaints of bribery were credible, but the bribery attempts were dismissed because rules governing the election do not prohibit offering or proposing to use union funds. Mark’s report noted, “The conduct revealed in this investigation” the report noted drily, “reflects a culture, or mind-set where elected union officials do not clearly distinguish between their fiduciary responsibilities to the union and their separate political objectives of achieving election.” “It’s not a surprise to any of us that the Hoffa administration routinely uses union funds to advance their campaign,” said Ken Paff of Teamsters for a Democratic Union, an internal reform group (good luck with that). Fred Gegare, an IBT vice president who is now challenging Hoffa for General President, said this about Hoffa, “Twelve years of his rule have gutted our contracts and driven us to the brink of bankruptcy. While members are struggling through a tough economy, he’s throwing dues money around to buy people off with stipends, raises and pensions.” ********** Sticky Fingers Current charges or sentences of embezzling union officials:

 http://www.nlpc.org/union-corruption-update