NLRB May Be Fighting a Losing Battle
posted at 9:25 am on April 28, 2011 by Jazz Shaw
One of the defining characteristics of the Obama administration thus far has been an unbending loyalty to the labor unions who served the Democrats so well during past election cycles. Americans, however, may be continuing a pattern of cooling in their attitudes toward unions as this recent Washington Examiner editorial explains, and it all comes down to the numbers.
A New York Times headline in January told the story: “Union membership in U.S. fell to 70-year low last year.” The actual numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics were even more dismal than suggested by the headline: Whereas at its peak in the mid-1950s, nearly 40 percent of all employed Americans were union members, by 2010, it had fallen to a mere 11.9 percent, counting both public- and private-sector employment. In the private sector alone, a mere 6.9 percent of all workers were unionized, the lowest in more than a century. Also notable here is that in 2009, for the first time ever, more than half of all union workers were employed by tax-funded local, state or federal governments rather than profit-driven private businesses.
But where public support fails, the strong left arm of the federal government may still come to the rescue. Most recently this has been demonstrated by a number of actions by the National Labor Relations Board, (NLRB) now plentifully stocked with former labor executives by President Obama. In one of their latest moves, they seem to be exercising powers never imagined for this group. When Boeing -bucking a national trend of cutting jobs – sought to expand production by adding a new manufacturing line in the non-union environs of South Carolina, the NLRB moved in to stop the move. This set off alarms in unexpected quarters.
The former chairman of the National Labor Relations Board told FoxNews.com that a board attorney’s bid to stop Boeing from opening a production line at a non-union site in South Carolina is “unprecedented” and could have serious implications for companies looking to expand.
The comments Tuesday from Peter Schaumber add to the roiling debate over the complaint filed last week against the aerospace giant. NLRB’s acting general counsel, taking up allegations from union workers at a Puget Sound plant in Washington state, had accused Boeing of violating federal labor law by moving to open a second 787 Dreamliner airplane production line in South Carolina.
If this isn’t a clear cut example of Washington usurping authority in the private sector to push a pro-union agenda in defiance of a private enterprise, I don’t know what is. Perhaps it’s past time for all of us to take a page from the previously linked editorial and take a fresh look at this relationship.
Clearly the time has come for Congress to rethink federal labor law using a clean sheet of paper. The NLRA and the NLRB were designed for an industrial economy that no longer exists. As relics of 1930s-style top-down command-economy thinking, the NLRA and NLRB simply cannot adapt to a decentralized digital economy in which fewer than one in 10 private-sector workers carry union cards. And with Obama appointees like Becker in charge, they have become obstacles to freedom and progress in America’s workplace.
Obama is supposed to be focused on jobs, remember? Who knew he was focused on stopping companies from creating new ones?









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Sounds like standard Chicago style pay to play. If the union doesn’t get a piece of the action, they stop the whole thing. I sincerely hope this action by the NLRB is overturned, either in Congress or the courts.
jwolf on April 28, 2011 at 9:33 AM
The new ‘smart power’ of obamaville is hard at work..
tinkerthinker on April 28, 2011 at 9:34 AM
They don’t know what they are getting into here.
They just messed with Nikki Haley, and are going to help her ascend to a national profile.
She will not tolerate this, and will fight them tooth and nail, which will endear her to the national conservative base even more.
Jindal/Haley 2020?
Could happen.
Brian1972 on April 28, 2011 at 9:39 AM
The gangsters in Washington would make the gangsters in Chicago blush…….oh wait, they are the same person. This cr@p is unbelievable.
MJZZZ on April 28, 2011 at 9:39 AM
That’s not all the NLRB has been up to lately. They also filed complaints against AZ and SD because our state constitutions require secret ballots when employees are voting on whether to unionize or not. The NLRB claims that these state law provisions conflict with federal law. The NLRB is trying to impose card check by fiat.
AZCoyote on April 28, 2011 at 9:43 AM
“The only thing I think about is jobs, jobs, jobs…” – President Barack Obama.
What kind of jobs is he thinking about. Does this guy, at NLRB, actually believe Boeing is going to add 1000 jobs in Washington State? Secondly, what on earth gives this guy the power to tell a company they can’t build a plant in another state? Perhaps Boeing will figure out a way to build it in Mexico and then where will we be???
bflat879 on April 28, 2011 at 9:46 AM
Then the feds can come into your business and order you to hire a transgendered, bucktoothed midget with one eye and a prosthetic big toe, all in the name of fairness on behalf of some aggrieved group.
Bishop on April 28, 2011 at 9:47 AM
The NLRB has just made themselves the next contestant on “Who wants to be completely defunded by Congress for overstepping their bounds?”
teke184 on April 28, 2011 at 9:47 AM
Revisit the Wagner Act, it’s a relic from long ago and it needs to reflect today’s realities.
Each and every one of us can help by avoiding the greedy union label. Don’t do business with unionized retailers, don’t buy products made by greedy unions including the UAW.
We need to decouple government unions and politicians. If a group of government workers wants to have a union, forbid that union from political contributions and advocacy. Anything else is turning a blind eye to corruption.
slickwillie2001 on April 28, 2011 at 9:48 AM
Well, they’re communists. Pure and simple. They didn’t call it the UNION of Soviet Socialists, for nothing.
capejasmine on April 28, 2011 at 9:49 AM
Boeing left Seattle due to disrespect. Boeing can move to China. In fact they should start looking at real estate in China.
seven on April 28, 2011 at 9:49 AM
When this story first came out a few days ago, I read some comments that the federal govt has Boeing over a barrel because of Boeing’s huge stakes in defense contracts. I don’t know if that is true, but it certainly sounds plausible. Further, the Obama regime would not be shy about exploiting such power, if they had it.
jwolf on April 28, 2011 at 9:51 AM
Obama is supposed to be focused on jobs
Obama is singlely focused on his own ass
J_Crater on April 28, 2011 at 9:51 AM
Counting the moments until a crooked Leftist judge decides to intervene.
viking01 on April 28, 2011 at 9:51 AM
Do not underestimate Nikki Haley’s willingness and ability to fight this.
SouthernGent on April 28, 2011 at 9:54 AM
They can move most production to China, but not all of it.
If they move the production of the plane’s wing over there, they’re screwed bc the Chinese will steal the technology that makes the plane fly and start building their own planes instead of buying from Boeing or Airbus.
teke184 on April 28, 2011 at 9:54 AM
This is the only way chumpthreads will get a job.
fossten on April 28, 2011 at 9:57 AM
Leftist garbage imposing such a vision on the US economy, not even found in the third world, might have “serious implications?”
Ya think?
MNHawk on April 28, 2011 at 10:00 AM
Trumka’s homes and cars don’t pay for themselves, you know, how is a brother supposed to live without forcibly extracting union dues from workers?
I’m sick and tired of the haters around here, refusing to spread their wealth fairly to the trash of society.
Bishop on April 28, 2011 at 10:03 AM
Can someone please ask Chief of Staff William Daley, former board member of Boeing when the SC decision was made, what he has to say on the Boeing matter?
WashJeff on April 28, 2011 at 10:03 AM
Recall that not only is the O’Bumbler trying to help his union buddies, but also the jobs would be in South Carolina, which didn’t vote for B.O. Let’s see if there are any Federal disaster declarations for the southeast as a result of the recent storms. Note also that Texas requested disaster relief after its wildfires, but B.O. refused.
This is classic Chicago politics: punish those who don’t vote for you.
Henry Bowman on April 28, 2011 at 10:04 AM
What’s the NLRB going to do if those jobs MOVE OFF SHORE?
GarandFan on April 28, 2011 at 10:11 AM
It’s all about pay for play and it’s going to stay this way as long as the Obama administration is in the driver seat. It’s going to take the Republicans taking back the US Senate in 2012 to act as a clear block to the power grabbing by the executive branch.
Dr Evil on April 28, 2011 at 10:14 AM
The one thing the NLRB will accomplish with Boeing and South Carolina is pretty frickin’ obvious. Boeing will build in Mexico or somewhere else besides the U.S. and who the he** would blame them?
Seriously, how can such a small percentage of American workers have such an enormous and detrimental impact on the whole friggin’ economy year after year after year? Unions have effectively killed every industry in this country with the exception of the trial lawyers.
Tim Zank on April 28, 2011 at 10:14 AM
Ed, note also that NLRB is suing Arizona and S. Dakota over card check, which they imply is law, without the bother of having a congressional vote on the matter.
http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2011/04/25/nlrb-sues-arizona-south-dakota-over-secret-ballot-amendments/
Vashta.Nerada on April 28, 2011 at 10:14 AM
Actually, Boeing isn’t moving. It’s just opening another plant to supplement work and prevent any disruptions from the unionized plant from disrupting ALL of their production.
I believe Boeing hired 1000 unionized workers at the Seattle plant, AND wants to build a new plant in SC for 2000 more workers. The company is not relocating, nor are they wanting workers to relocate.
The NLRB is trying to prevent Boeing from mitigating production risk from the union plants, since it would reduce the effectiveness of union strikes to inflict harm on the company.
dominigan on April 28, 2011 at 10:16 AM
Boeing also has a plant in St Louis, MO.
That is where they built B-17s, B-29s and B-52s.
Brian1972 on April 28, 2011 at 10:18 AM
Actually, anyone paying attention for the last few years knows this, and knew it early on.
Midas on April 28, 2011 at 10:20 AM
Vashta.Nerada on April 28, 2011 at 10:14 AM
He’s not Ed.
kingsjester on April 28, 2011 at 10:23 AM
From your lips to Boehner’s ears.
petefrt on April 28, 2011 at 10:29 AM
Nothing, absolutely nothing gets purchased here in my home that is known to come from union related sources. Unions should be able to sell themselves and their brand by way of being a viable product, not by use of thuggery and corruption.
Keemo on April 28, 2011 at 10:31 AM
I look for the union label … and don’t buy if I see it.
besser tot als rot on April 28, 2011 at 10:38 AM
Is it any wonder that jobs are slow to be created? Every time that you think that this administration is finished inputting uncertainty into the economy, they come up with new and imaginative ways to scare the crap out of businesses considering expansion.
besser tot als rot on April 28, 2011 at 10:42 AM
There ya go. The most brilliant Prsident evah implies that he actually doesn’t think very much.
Kinda matches up with Rush telling Hank Haney that he is too smart to golf well because he can’t make his mind stop working.
Obama doesn’t have that problem. He keeps his lazy mind in neutral most of the time. On the course, behind the Resolute desk, bowing to dictators, focussing on jobs, all at the same meandering speed.
rwenger43 on April 28, 2011 at 10:43 AM
I just called up Senator Toomey’s office about this. I probably should call up Senator Casey’s office also, but it’s hard for me to commit to wasting my time.
thuja on April 28, 2011 at 10:47 AM
I have said it before.
The last thing we want is ObaMao thinking about jobs.
Slowburn on April 28, 2011 at 11:37 AM
If it’s a choice between that and the survival of their civil aviation business, I think they’ll be over there in an instant — probably via a cross-licensing agreement with a Chinese civil aviation firm. It’s not the technology that would be stolen — it would be the quality processes Boeing uses to assure a consistently excellent product. The unions in Washington are trying to assure that if Boeing doesn’t agree to their demands, the unions can completely shut down Boeing’s assembly line. I doubt that Boeing will sit still and let that happen. An alternate supply line will happen, either here in the USA or somewhere else in the world (remember, China isn’t the only capable manufactory in the world).
unclesmrgol on April 28, 2011 at 11:39 AM
Not only Nikki Haley, but also Jim DeMint, who is also from SC. Jim DeMint is a rising conservative star in the Senate, and he will probably push the Senate to vote on a bill to curb NRLB’s powers, if they are killing jobs in his state. He might be able to get support from some Democrats from “right-to-work” states, such as Nelson (NE), Pryor(AR), and Landrieu(LA).
But can the NLRB actually “stop” Boeing from opening a non-union production line in SC? With the amount of profit Boeing makes on selling a single plane, couldn’t Boeing simply pay a fine to the NLRB and run the plant anyway? Besides, there is nothing really “illegal” about building planes with non-union workers. There are plenty of factories in America, mostly in the South, where non-union American workers build cars for companies like Toyota, Honda, and Nissan. Why is it OK for Japanese companies to hire non-union American workers, and not an American company like Boeing?
Steve Z on April 28, 2011 at 12:05 PM
THIS!!!! Every time someone asks why we don’t make things in America anymore, this is my response.
CantCureStupid on April 28, 2011 at 12:16 PM
Boeing does have huge stakes in defense contracts, but who would be the alternative? European-based Airbus? There was a HUGE outcry when the Pentagon (under Obama) favored Airbus over Boeing for a military tanker plane, especially when it was discovered that the plane Boeing proposed could land on, and take off from, shorter runways than the plane Airbus proposed, and long runways are rare in war-torn countries!
Would the Obama Administration, in order to “protect” union jobs in Washington State, go so far as to outsource jobs providing for the American military to Europe? Probably not–the Republican-controlled House could always de-fund a military procurement project from a foreign supplier, and Obama probably wouldn’t want to pick THAT fight!
Steve Z on April 28, 2011 at 12:20 PM
I’ll give you a personal example of what union thinknig has done to me here in ND.
According to century code here in ND, no school district is allowed to pay any incoming teacher off of the district pay scale unless they can provide evidence of a shortage. Then they are free to up the ante above & beyond in order to attract a qualified candidate.
I interviewed for a job where there were 3 other interviewees.
And none of them are evidently worth a damn & 2 of them I hear should probably not be teaching young people.
Scary bunch.
I interviewed & they want me.
Problem is, I cannot take a pay cut.
I was willing to take a small loss in pay, but not the $5,000/yr from where I’m at now to the other school.
I want to leave here bcs it is a wreck, leadership-wise.
The other school wants an experienced competent teacher so their kids do not suffer educationally, which they will if they hire any of the yahoos that applied.
So now we are wrangling for me to split my time equally btw 2 schools, which might work.
I would do anything to get out of where I’m at, but I can’t afford a huge paycut like that.
This is what the union has done for folks like me.
In the real world, I would be hired at what it took to get me & that is that.
But no. Only in Insane-Land do we think it’s perfectly acceptable to pay everyone equally for unequal work & qualifications.
Lovely.
Badger40 on April 28, 2011 at 12:21 PM
I was an engineer at douglas aircraft company on the C-17 project. At the time, Douglas already had a chinese production facility over in China helping them build I think the MD80′s. When Boeing took over McDonnelDouglas, I presume they kept running the chinese facility. If so, it would not take much to increase that plant, either.
karenhasfreedom on April 28, 2011 at 12:22 PM
Like a fool, I bought a Ford last year. Ford>UAW. I should have purchased a Honda or Toyota, obviously. I realize that now.
It is time for open economic warfare against all union manufacturing and the PEU maggots. Privatize!
Jaibones on April 28, 2011 at 1:07 PM