NLRB Suppresses Dissent to Ram Through Controversial Rule
It is becoming increasingly clear that the Obama administration, NLRB, AFL-CIO, SEIU all have the same goal in mind: increasing union membership by any means necessary
NLRB officials have been relentless in forging new rules aimed at limiting the amount of time between when a union announces an election and when the NLRB monitored election occurs. Employers are currently afforded, on average, 31 days to educate their employees about the pros and cons of unionization. Effectively silencing an employer, the NLRB rule would allow the NLRB to hold an election only ten days after the union informs the employer of intent to unionize.
More importantly, this will give workers an insufficient amount of time to consider joining a union. When workers cast their ballot, they will do so having heard one side of the story—the unions.
Unfortunately, this type of behavior is par for the course. What is surprising is how the pro-union Obama appointees disregarded the Board’s own operating rules to silence Republican Member Hayes and silence public opinion.
I criticized the majority’s use of a rulemaking process as opaque, exclusionary, and adversarial…That criticism apparently made no impression on my colleagues, who have continued this process in the same manner, and without my participation; and, who have now made in unequivocally clear that they intend to publish a final rule before the expiration of Member’s appointment without regard to Board tradition or rule.
This shocking abuse of the rules to advance a partisan agenda is further reason to support the Workforce Democracy and Fairness Act, which overturns the NLRB expedited ambush election rule.