Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.
It seems that Obama was serious when he said all he needed was a pen and a phone. This guy really believes himself to be a monarch.
Sooner rather his reprehensible unconstitutional overreaches are going to come back and bite him in the ass. Why is this true?
What part of the U.S. Constitution gives any board the right to do something so unquestionably unconstitutional? Short answer: “None What So Ever.”
As Yogi Berra once said, ” It’s déjà vu all over again.”
By Washington Times (DC) February 6, 2014
Republicans and business groups blasted a decision Wednesday by the politically divided National Labor Relations Board to speed up the process for employees to form unions in so-called “ambush elections.”
While labor leaders cheered the move, Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, senior Republican on the Senate labor committee, said the decision was another example of President Obama using the NLRB for liberal advocacy.
“Ambush elections are one more example of how the Obama National Labor Relations Board continues to be more of a union advocate than an umpire,” Mr. Alexander said in a statement. “This latest effort is a political power play on behalf of unions that makes an end run around employers and forces workers to make decisions without all of the facts.”
The NLRB said in a 3-2 decision released Wednesday that it was reissuing rules to shorten the time for employee elections and to require employers to provide employee phone numbers and e-mails to union leaders before a vote.
The panel first issued the rule in 2011, but a federal judge struck it down, saying the NLRB lacked a quorum at the time. It is now operating at full strength for the first time in Mr. Obama’s presidency.
“Unnecessary delay and inefficiencies hurt both employees and employers,” NLRB Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce said in a statement. “These proposals are intended to improve the process for all parties, in all cases, whether non-union employees are seeking a union to represent them or unionized employees are seeking to decertify a union.”
Mr. Pearce joined Democratic appointees Kent Hirozawa and Nancy Schiffer in approving the rules. Republicans Philip Miscimarra and Harry Johnson said in their dissent that shortening the time for elections would “curtail the right of employers, union and employees” before a union is formed.
AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka hailed the decision, saying management had used the old ruled to indefinitely delay organizing drives.
“When workers petition for an NLRB election, they should receive a timely opportunity to vote,” Mr. Trumka said. “But the current NLRB election process is riddled with delay and provides too many opportunities for employers to manipulate and drag out the process through costly and unnecessary litigation and deny workers a vote.”
Business groups such as the National Retail Federation criticized the move, while admitting they were not surprised by the divided board’s vote.
“What’s not new is the NLRB’s desire to support union activism over sound public policy,” said NRF Senior Vice President David French. “The rule will limit the freedom of speech and expression of workers and businesses alike, and is part of NLRB’s coordinated campaign to tilt union elections toward their friends and allies in Big Labor.
NLRB’s proposed ambush election rule is an answer in search of a problem.”
House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman John Kline, Minnesota Republican, said the ruling “will make it virtually impossible for workers to make an informed decision in union elections.”
“Just as troubling, the rule is a direct threat to the privacy of workers and their families,” Mr. Kline said. “Joining a union is an important decision; every employee deserves a reasonable amount of time to consider all the facts before casting his or her vote.
Current policies provide workers such an opportunity, and they shouldn’t be discarded in a blatant ploy to benefit union bosses. The committee will continue to conduct aggressive oversight of this deeply misguided rule.”