stay connected

FrumForum Facebook FrumForum YouTube Update Twitter FrumForum Flickr

Obama Nominee Wants To Strip Employers

May 10th, 2009 at 7:59 pm by FF Washington Insider | 2 Comments |

Share

Very revealing article written by Craig Becker, President Obama’s announced “intention to nominate” Democrat candidate for the National Labor Relations Board.  On page 500, at the end of the paragraph continuing over from the preceding page is a telling comment: “[I conclude] that employers should be stripped of any legally cognizable interest in their employees’ election of [union] representatives.”   Perhaps this explains why the President announced “an intention to nominate” instead of a formal nomination.  If you have a particular concern regarding this article, the author’s views, and his conclusion as stated above, you may wish to voice your concern over the candidate.  An NLRB Member is to interpret and enforce the law as written by Congress, not to advance one’s own view.  With a belief that employers have NO role or interest regarding employee unionization, it may be concerning that the author is in line to be considered and voted by the Senate to be an NLRB Member.

Recent Posts by FF Washington Insider



2 responses so far

  • 1 ottovbvs // May 11, 2009 at 5:05 am

    Washington Insider obviously thinks it’s ok for a company to influence the election of union representatives. I wonder if he thinks it’s ok for a union to influence the election of board members to companies in which they may have an interest. I doubt it. Becker’s position seems not unreasonable otherwise you’re only a step away from returning to company unions.

  • 2 midcon // May 11, 2009 at 5:06 am

    Here is an opportunity to do something positive instead of just saying “NO.” Why not identify companies that are not unionized and where the employees do not see a need for unionization and then explain to America why that is the case.

    There are companies where employees are essentially treated as simply labor in the economic model where unions could (if they were not corrupt) provide tangible benefits to the workers.

    There are companies where there are advantages for the company in terms of a stable workforce because the union provides a hiring hall, apprentice program, etc.

    Since industrialization, American companies generally do not have an enviable record when it comes to its employees.

    However, as I said in the beginning of this, there are companies that do. Why doesn’t the GOP celebrate them, celebrate how they operate? Until then, workers have a right to band together and companies have a right to hire only at will employees. Neither can be trust by each other. And neither are trusted by me.

You must log in to post a comment.