Blog

The Senate is getting ready to vote on five nominees to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). They should confirm the whole package and get the NLRB functioning again. They are also voting on several other nominees from judges to cabinet positions. If Republicans filibuster to obstruct these, it is time to fix the filibuster. We just had an election and the results were decisive. Republicans must stop obstructing democracy.

A “Full Package” Of NLRB Nominees

President Obama has nominated 5 people to serve on the NLRB. Two of these are “management side” (i.e. anti-union) Republicans. Labor and other groups are urging the Senate to confirm all of these nominees as a “package” so the NLRB can get back to work. Working people need and deserve a functioning NLRB, and confirmation of the “full package” of nominees will provide that stability

400 professors and 125 leaders nationwide have signed letters urging the Senate to confirm these nominees and get the NLRB functioning.

More than two dozen women’s organizations have also written urging confirmation of the nominees, (from AFL-CIO blog),

The National Labor Relations Board has long worked to ensure the rights of employees to bargain collectively, if they choose to do so. This work is particularly meaningful for women… Unions have always been important to advancing women’s economic security. Union wage and benefit structures are typically more transparent than those for non-union workplaces, which in turn helps to decrease wage discrimination… working families need a functioning, fully-staffed National Labor Relations Board to protect their right to an important strategy in the fight for economic security: collective bargaining. (more…)

President Obama has nominated five people to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Two are Republicans. All are waiting for confirmation by the Senate. Let your senators know these nominees should be confirmed so the NLRB can get back to work.

What Is The NLRB?

The NLRB is the agency that “safeguards employees’ rights to organize and to determine whether to have unions as their bargaining representative. The agency also acts to prevent and remedy unfair labor practices committed by private sector employers and unions.”

The NLRB supervises elections to form or decertify unions in the workplace. It investigates charges that employees, unions or employers violated rules over labor practices and rules on the charges. It works to get problems resolved rather than taken to court. And finally, when the NLRB has issued a ruling that is ignored it can take the parties to court.

But if the NLRB is prevented from operating there is no one to make sure that the rules for labor practices are being enforced. This hurts workers and companies.

Background Of The Nomination Battle

Individual workers have little power when up against giant corporations. They can ask for better pay, benefits and working conditions, please, and the giant companies can just say, “you’re fired” if they do — and working people know that. However, when the employees all band together it gives them collective power. It’s the old story of how a person can break a single stick, but when all the sticks are bundled together the person is not able to break them. Banding together the workers have the power to get better wages, benefits and working conditions.

The other side of this is that big companies can make a lot of money if they can keep their workers from organizing unions. So they use their money and power to try to stop workers from organizing unions. (more…)

Today Congress essentially told working Americans to drop dead. House Republicans pushed through a dangerous bill that would paralyze the National Labor Relations Board, blocking the only path that workers have to workplace justice.

H.R. 1120, the “Preventing Greater Uncertainty in Labor-Management Relations Act,” is designed to advance a recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decision, known as Noel Canning v. NLRB, challenging the constitutionality of President Barack Obama’s recess appointments to the board.

Under the decision, the NLRB only has one Senate-confirmed member – Chairman Mark Pearce, a Democrat whose term expires this August.

Now H.R. 1120 seeks to freeze all activities of the NLRB that requires a full quorum, or three members. It would also bar the NLRB from enforcing any decisions it has made since Jan. 4, 2012, when Obama made those disputed recess appointments.

How did we get here? The blame mainly falls on the broken Senate rules.

When Obama took office, the NLRB only had two members. In April 2009, Obama nominated three people to serve on the NLRB – Pearce, Craig Becker (D) and Brian Hayes (R). Yet Senate Republicans’ silent filibusters were effective in preventing a Senate vote on these nominees.

In March 2010, Obama recess appointed Becker and Pearce to the board. In June, the Senate confirmed Pearce and Hayes, but continued to block Becker.

When Becker’s recess appointment expired on Jan. 3, 2012, the NLRB didn’t have a quorum to make decisions. Confronted with Senate Republicans intent on undermining the NLRB’s authority, Obama made three recess appointments – Sharon Block (D), Richard Griffin (D) and Terence Flynn (R) – to guarantee a fully functioning board.  These members joined Pearce and Hayes, who left the board in December 2012. (Flynn resigned after an ethics scandal in March 2012.)

Senate Republicans argued the Senate had not formally recessed, but stayed in a “pro forma” session even though no business took place. Later, the Court of Appeals’ three-judge panel – all appointed by Republicans – made their Noel Canning ruling.

But Obama’s actions weren’t unusual. In fact, every president has made similar recess appointments. More than 300 such appointments were made by Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama.

The president didn’t have to resort to such measures, if only the Senate had reformed its outdated rules. The ability of Senators to endlessly hold up presidential nominations was a big reason why Fix the Senate Now coalition pushed to overhaul the rules earlier this year. Unfortunately, those reforms didn’t happen. As a result, even the Court of Appeals that decided Noel Canning is currently missing three justices, thanks to the broken Senate rules and the determination of Republican Senators to block nearly every judicial nomination made by Obama. (more…)

The corporate/conservative effort to gut the country’s labor-law enforcement continues at full steam. Senate Republicans are blocking NLRB Board confirmations. Republican judges blocked the the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) from operating until the Senate confirms Board members. Today House Republicans are moving on a bill to just shut the NLRB down.

People vs Concentrated Power

Unions mean higher wages, benefits and safer working conditions for working people. This means “labor” — i.e. you (unless you own a big company) — gets a share of the benefits of our economy. This is because unions partially (only partially) balance the power difference between individuals and giant corporations.

One person against great wealth and power rarely stands a chance. That is why We, the People formed our government of, by and for the People. We, the People acting together (collectively) can used to be able to fight back against the concentrated power of great wealth.

Similarly, when individual people come up against the concentrated power of the giant corporations alone, they are at their mercy. One person saying, “Please, Sir, can I have a raise?” doesn’t cut it. But dozens or hundreds or thousands of people acting together is collective power, which balances the equation to some degree. (Except when “trade” deals enable the giant companies to ship jobs our of the country, pitting low-wage, exploited workers against American workers, and say, “Shut up or we’ll move your job out of the country, too.”)

The right to form a union, bargain collectively and engage in legitimate union activities without fear of retaliation or intimidation is the law of the land, and Wall Street and the large corporations don’t like it one bit. Not one bit at all.

NLRB And The Law

Congress enacted the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) in 1935. It’s the law.

Take a look at Section 1 of the NLRA. In summary, it states that it is the position the position of We the People, (a.k.a. government,) that lack of bargaining power by workers against corporations leads to Depressions (we call them recessions now) — the result of depressed purchasing power. And it leads to strikes, which disrupt commerce. Therefore, it is the policy of the United States to encourage collective bargaining.

According to NLRB :

The NLRA protects the rights of employees to:

• Form or join a union
• Bargain collectively for a contract that sets wages, benefits, hours, and other working conditions
• Discuss wages, working conditions or union organizing with co-workers or a union
• Act with co-workers to improve working conditions by raising complaints with an employer or a government agency
• Strike and picket their employer, depending on the purpose or means of the action
• Choose not to join a union or engage in union activities
• Organize coworkers to decertify a union
  If employees choose a union as their bargaining representative, the union and employer must bargain in good faith in a genuine effort to reach a binding agreement setting out terms and conditions of employment. The union is required to fairly represent employees in bargaining and enforcing the agreement. (more…)

A panel of Republican-appointed judges, including one who has, according to Think Progress, previously suggested that all business, labor and Wall Street regulation is constitutionally suspect, ruled that President Obama’s 2012 recess appointments of three members to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) are invalid. Senate Republicans had been blocking confirmation votes on the three before the president’s action.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka called the ruling “shocking.”

In a radical and unprecedented decision, the court has interpreted the Constitution in a way that would deprive both Republican and Democratic presidents of a critical tool they have used hundreds of times over the years—including 179 appointments by former President George W. Bush and 139 appointments by former President Clinton—to keep agencies functioning and make the government work. In this case, the affected agency is the National Labor Relations Board—a crucially important agency that enforces workers’ rights.

On Jan. 4, 2012, Obama appointed Deputy Labor Secretary Sharon Block, attorney Richard Griffin and NLRB counsel Terence Flynn to fill vacancies on the labor board, bringing it to full strength for the first time in more than a year. (more…)

Terence Flynn, National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) member, resigned last Friday, effective July 24. He has immediately recused himself from all agency business and has asked that the President withdraw his nomination for Board Member of the NLRB.

The NLRB Inspector General earlier this year issued two reports describing how Flynn funneled confidential information about NLRB activities and deliberations, including attorney-client privileged information, to two former NLRB members who have worked to undermine and discredit the NLRB. One of those former members was Peter Schaumber—who co-chaired the labor policy advisory group for Mitt Romney’s campaign.

Terrence Flynn

The Inspector General found additional instances when Flynn funneled confidential information to Schaumber. These included a draft of an NLRB decision, dissents before cases have been decided and other information on the NLRB’s internal operations.

According to the NLRB:

Earlier today, Chairman Pearce informed NLRB employees of the resignation and, on behalf of the entire Board, thanked them for their “hard work and commitment to excellence through even the most difficult circumstances.” He intends to issue a statement after communicating with the staff on Tuesday.

From the New York Times:

In one instance, Mr. Berry found that Mr. Flynn had secretly helped Mr. Schaumber write an opinion column that denounced an N.L.R.B. decision that favored labor unions. Mr. Berry called that action by Mr. Flynn “an abuse of his discretion.”

The Flynn case has been referred to the Justice Department for investigation and to the Federal Office of Special Counsel, which is looking into possible violations of the Hatch Act, which bars federal employees from participating in partisan political activity.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka called for Flynn’s immediate resignation in March and Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) called for him to resign earlier this month.

Flynn was sworn in as a Board Member on Jan. 9, 2012. He joined the Board in 2003 as Chief Counsel to Schaumber, and had previously  been in private practice. The letter of resignation, dated May 25, was delivered via FAX and email on May 26.

***

This is republished from the AFL-CIO Blog.

The National Labor Relation Board (NLRB) has taken action against Verizon for the firing and disciplining of its workers after a two-week strike last August.

NLRB Region 2 has authorized the issuance of a complaint against Verizon for 58 of the 63 cases of unfair dismissal or discipline charges brought by the Communications Workers of America (CWA).

Ron Collins, CWA chief of staff, says, “This is tremendous news for workers who have faced harsh discipline, even firing, from Verizon that was completely unwarranted.”

This fight has been about economic justice from the beginning. Some 45,000 CWA and IBEW members spent two weeks on the picket line to force this $100 billion company to bargain fairly, not continue to demand givebacks of $1 billion a year. (more…)

Based on a technicality, a federal judge Monday rejected commonsense rules making National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) union elections fairer.

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg said the NLRB did not technically have a quorum when it adopted the rules last year. The NLRB had three members at the time; two approved the rules and the third, Republican Brian Hayes, took no action.

Had Hayes voted or indicated his choice to abstain, that could have signified a quorum, according to the judge.

“We think the judge’s ruling is flat-out wrong,” says AFL-CIO General Counsel Lynn Rhinehart. “Brian Hayes was a sitting, working, paid member of the NLRB when the rule was adopted, and remains so today….The judge’s ruling, while in our view incorrect, is solely based on technical issues that speak to the procedure of the board and not the rule itself.” (more…)

“What’s it all about, Romney?
Is it just for the moment we live?
What’s it all about when you sort it out, Romney?
Are we meant to take more than we give. . .”  ~With apologies to Burt Bacharach and Hal David who wrote the original song, “Alfie”

As Mitt Romney laughs while “apologizing” for bullying a fellow high school student and mocks NASCAR fans’ plastic rain slickers, he seems unaware that he comes off as Richie Rich’s evil twin.

Part of Romney’s image problem is that he leads not as a selfless Lincolnesque statesman but as an Ayn Rand greed worshiper. Setting the standard for his campaign, Romney gave a high-profile plug to a company owned and run by major donors. His son has followed in those ethically challenged footsteps by using his campaign connections to launch a business. And a campaign adviser benefitted from illicitly leaked confidential government information.

In RomneyWorld, that’s all OK. His answer to the song’s question, “Are we meant to take more than we give,” is a resounding “YES.”  “What’s it all about?” For Romney, it’s about exploiting the 99 percent for the profit of the 1 percent. That vulture capitalist philosophy is bad enough in the business world, but it’s dead wrong for public service. As the head of his company, Romney made so much money that he squirreled it away in the Cayman Islands and secret Swiss bank accounts. But shadiness and avarice aren’t attributes Americans prize in the head of their country.

Romney’s stealth product placement occurred in December. He endorsed the business of donors Bill Heavener, CEO of Full Sail University, and C. Kevin Landry, chairman of TA Associates, the private equity firm that owns the Florida college. On at least two campaign stops, Romney specifically named and promoted Full Sail University, urging students to consider such for-profit colleges to contain the cost of higher education.

Romney didn’t mention that the price of many Full Sail programs is $40,000 a year – thirteen times that of a typical not-for-profit community college. And Romney neglected to mention that Heavener is co-chairman of the Romney fund-raising team in Florida. And that Heavener gave $45,000 and Landry $40,000 to the Romney super PAC Restore Our Future.

How hard would it have been for Romney to say: “By the way, this campaign stop brought to you by Full Sail University, a school with a spotty graduation rate whose CEO happens to love me.” That’s what ethical television anchors do when they broadcast glowing stories about companies with financial ties to station owners. (more…)

Mitt Romney’s “mole” inside the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has “undermined the enforcement of laws enacted by Congress…demonstrated a fundamental lack of integrity…and breached numerous standards of ethical conduct” by funneling confidential NLRB information to the Romney campaign’s chief labor adviser, says Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa).

A second report released last week by the NLRB’s inspector general outlined NLRB member Terence Flynn’s sharing of information with Peter Schaumber, who previously served as Romney’s top labor aide. In a letter to Flynn requesting documents and information concerning several incidents, Harkin writes:

According to the Inspector General [IG] report, you violated multiple ethical guidelines….The conduct described in the reports breaches the most fundamental trust placed in a federal employee, particularly one entrusted to be an impartial observer.

The IG report says that Flynn sent Schaumber draft opinions in cases before the board had voted on them. Josh Eidelson writes in Salon:

The IG wrote that Flynn provided Schaumber info that the NLRB would have withheld even if Congress requested it. ‘Mr. Flynn’s public statement that he has engaged in no wrongdoing,’ wrote the IG, ‘strikes at the very heart of the Board and all but eviscerates the due process procedures that the Board has established.’ (more…)