July 22, 2011

Republicans baaaaad, says lefty pub

Headline on "The Hill," a Democrat-supporting website:
"House Republicans advance bill to curb authority of labor relations board"

Republicans on [a House Committee] approved legislation that would limit the authority of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Republicans have been attacking the labor board ever since it issued a complaint on April 20 that accused Boeing of retaliating against union workers.

The company moved the production line to [a state that] prohibits mandatory union membership, after executives worried that work stoppages at their unionized operations in Washington state could delay production. The labor board found that to be retaliation against union workers and issued their complaint, which is now before an administrative law judge.

The legislation introduced by Republicans takes aim at the labor board’s authority, and would prohibit the NLRB from ordering a company to transfer or relocate its existing or planned employment.

Anyone else see a pattern here?

If the federal government can order a company to abandon a new production facility, opened in a right-to-work state, on the ground that this act violates federal law by being considered retaliation against a strike-happy union, no business can make any investment plans without a similar fear.

For example, if BMW were to open a car assembly line in a RTW state, why wouldn't that be "retaliation" as well, since the company could have located the plant in a forced-union state?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home