Brian Hayes, Esq.
National Labor Relations Board
1099 14th St. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20570-0001
Dear Member Hayes:
Our nation stands at the precipice of disaster, its future generations are indebted due to the overindulgent spending of politicians from both political parties. Our unemployment is untenably high, our welfare roles expanded beyond reason, both with no signs of easing. Meanwhile, our nation’s job creators are burdened with an over-regulating, activist government whose sole existence at this point is to appease special constituencies. It is for these reasons, and more, that you are urged to resign your position as a member of the National Labor Relations Board.
Given last year’s Supreme Court decision in New Process Steel, you know that the National Labor Relations Board must have three members to effectuate its rulings and decisions. You may recall the reason for the New Process Steel decision stemmed from Senate Democrats’ purposeful and calculating decision not to allow President Bush’s nominees to be confirmed as members to the National Labor Relations Board, as well as the blocking of any recess appointments.
With the expiration of Chairman Liebman’s term this past weekend, the NLRB is once again down to three members—two union appointees (newly appointed Chairman Mark Pearce and Member Craig Becker) and yourself. If you resign your position, the NLRB will become incapacitated—unable to wreak any more havoc on America’s job creators. Moreover, as long as Congress does not go into recess, thereby depriving the President the ability to recess appoint any more union extremists, America’s employers may begin to breathe with some ease again and, as a result, begin to create jobs.
With NLRB Member Becker’s recess appointment expiring in January, as long as Congress does not go into recess, the NLRB will be incapacitated anyway following the expiration of Becker’s recess appointment. However, the destruction that the union activists at the NLRB are capable of doing between now and January is without precedent, as evidenced by last Thursday’s NRLB mandate on all NLRB-covered employers to post union notices in their workplaces (or, as penalty, be charged with an unfair labor practice) that you and others have stated is without Congressional authority.
Member Hayes, America’s job creators cannot wait until January for there to be relief from the union extremists controlling our nation’s capitol. Unfortunately, the Obama NLRB has become nothing more than a tool for union bosses whose agenda is to unionize employers at the expense of both jobs and employee freedom. Only you, at this moment in time, have the ability to stop this. Hopefully, your resignation will help incapacitate the NLRB until after the 2012 elections, when the American people will have the ability to democratically decide the role our government should be playing in propping up labor union bosses.
Rest assured, many recognize the yeoman’s job you have done in providing thorough and well-reasoned arguments in your dissents. However, in nearly every case, you have been outvoted and the dissents you have given have been made irrelevant. Our nation can no longer afford to have a labor board that is solely doing union bosses’ bidding and the only way to stop this NLRB’s job-killing agenda is to incapacitate it.
While union bosses and their Democratic puppets may cry in hypocritical hysteria, their actions in vacating their positions (with labor union help) in Wisconsin and Indiana nullify any legitimacy to their complaints.
Member Hayes, as the lone individual at the NLRB who has the power to stop the insanity from this rogue agency, please resign.
On behalf of America’s job creators and the 93% of American workers who have chosen to remain or become union-free, please resign immediately.
With highest regards,
LaborUnionReport.com Takes On Fascistic Obama Regulator
WH P2P operatives intent on corrupting U.S. workplaces
Proposed changes in National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) election procedures are aimed at shortening the time between filing a petition and the vote.(from washingtonexaminer.com)
At present that time averages 37 days. Under the new rules, the NLRB would strive for an average of 10.
The NLRB’s approach to the issue of union certification is based on the false premise that there are only two parties concerned with the issue – the union and the employer. There are, in fact, three parties – the union, the employer and the employees.
Other than whether to accept a job, the decision about whether or not to be represented by a union is one of the most important employment-related decisions an employee can make. It is essential that this be a well-informed decision.
Most employees don’t want to be members of a labor union. In August 1999, the Gallup Poll asked “Would you, personally, like to belong to a labor union at work, or not?”
Only 21 percent said “yes,” while 76 percent said “no.” In August 2006, a Zogby Poll asked, “Would you personally like to be a member of a labor union?” Only 20 percent said “yes,” while 74 percent said “no.”
Regulations to shorten the time between the filing of a representation petition and the election date have the potential for a negative unintended consequence for organized labor.
Employers who viewed the unionization of their workforce as a threat might be tempted to make anti union programs a regular part of their human resources activity rather than something that was only necessary when the occasion arose. This might serve to heighten tensions and in the long run make it even more difficult for union organizers to succeed.
The present system reflects a balance between the interests of employers and unions. In the process the interests of the most important participants, the employees, are served to a limited extent.
Changing the system in an effort to provide an advantage to labor unions would be a disservice to the employees involved and has the potential for harmful consequences.
David Denholm is president of the Public Service Research Foundation.
The Missing Amendment
The National Debt Relief Amendment
“An increase in the federal debt requires approval from a majority of the legislatures of the separate States.”
What Makes the Amendment Effective:
- It creates a national consensus prior to allowing Congress to incur additional debt.
- It returns prudence and fiscal responsibility to Washington.
- It improves government transparency and accountability.
- It protects all of us from a runaway Congress.
- It places a restraint on Congress by balancing power.
- It is fair for everyone.
It's payback time for oligarchical unionist-collectivists
The Obama Administration has fired its opening salvo against a cornerstone of democracy: the right to secret ballot.(from biggovernment.com)
Last fall, voters in four states voted overwhelmingly to amend their constitutions protect the right of workers to vote by secret ballot in deciding whether or not to form unions. That right has been enshrined in federal law for 75 years but is threatened by bills pending in Congress.
Nonetheless, the Obama National Labor Relations Board has filed a lawsuit against Arizona seeking to halt its protection of the right to secret ballot. Federal law governs labor relations, the NLRB asserts, and states cannot provide greater security for worker rights.
Why is the Obama Administration taking such a profoundly anti-democratic position? The answer is simple: it’s pay-off time for the massive labor union support Barack Obama received in the 2008 election.
On this day: August 30
Community Organizing for the New Progressive Era
Fanya Kaplan, an assassin, shoots and seriously injures Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin; this, along with the assassination of Bolshevik senior official Moisei Uritsky days earlier, prompts the decree for Red Terror (1918)
Hotline between U.S. and Soviet leaders goes into operation (1963)
Tatarstan declares independence from the RSFSR (1990)
b: Huey Long (1893), Molly Ivins (1944), d: Konstantin Rodzaevsky (1946), Guy Burgess (1963)
Community Organizing for the New Progressive Era