Posted by Labor Law Guy | Posted on 11-02-2010
Category : Federal Labor Law
Tags: Barack Obama, Craig Becker, James Hoffa, NLRB
Even a couple of Democrats from states that generally vote Republican joined the GOP in keeping alive a Senate filibuster on the nomination vote for Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
Now, with our hard-working Senators set to take next week off for a Presidents' Day recess (how many of you have the week off?), Barack Obama has hinted at some recess appointments. Trouble with those, however, is that they're only good until the next election, which just happens to be later this year.
Anyway, we'll find out soon enough. In the meantime, though, I got a good chuckle out of reading a hypocrisy-laden critique of the Senate's filibuster by International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT) President James Hoffa,to wit:
“The President ought to be able to appoint who he wants to sit on the NLRB. Politics should not stand in the way of a well qualified [sic] appointee. "
Substitute Robert Bork as the rejected appointee and the Supreme Count for the NLRB, and do you think Hoff would ever utter such a concept?
Posted by Labor Law Guy | Posted on 04-02-2010
Category : Collective Bargaining/Unions, Federal Labor Law
Tags: Craig Becker, Scott Brown
Craig Becker, subject of a few posts here lately because of his views (since semi-renounced for confirmation's purposes) regarding legislating labor law from the bench of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), saw his nomination affirmed today by a party-line vote of 13-10 in the Senate's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee.
It was the Democrats' goal to rush through all controversial appointments before newly elected Massachusetts GOP Senator Scott Brown could be seated (set for Nov. 11 originally), but Brown has now moved up his seating to today at 5 p.m., affording Republicans a 41-vote front to stop the Senate in its tracks through filibuster.
Does this mean Becker will be filibustered out of his appointment?
In three words: "I hope so."
Rejected procedurally by the full Senate on Christmas Eve, Craig Becker had his day in court yesterday (Feb. 2, 2010) as he was grilled by the Senate's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, which in 2009 voted 15-8 to send his name to the full Senate for confirmation but was blocked by Senator John McCain (R.-Arizona), who used Senatorial prerogative to place a hold on the vote.
Becker is controversial for suggesting that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), to which he has been nominated by President Obama twice now, can issue a gag order on employers during union organization drives and can also green light the use of card authorization rather than secret ballot elections for unionization.
Yesterday, he backed down, saying:
"The law is clear that the decision…(of) an alternative route to certification rests with Congress and not the board," Becker said, adding that the writings were "intended to be provocative and to ask fundamental questions in order for scholars and others to re-evaluate."
The writings to which he referred were the documents in which he made his suggestions about the NLRB's acting alone to take pro-labor positions.
Becker is a union lawyer and academic who was served as counsel for both the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the AFL-CIO.
From what I've read, however, no one bothered to ask Becker if he would favor minority unions–in other words, forcing employers to bargain with unions that are formed by a minority of the total represented workers voting as a majority (of a minority).
That could be a big worry.
Posted by Labor Law Guy | Posted on 21-01-2010
Category : Federal Labor Law
Tags: Craig Becker, EFCA
Dubya had no problem using recess appointments to put people into positions of power whom the Democrats, post-2006, would never approve.
Barack Obama faces a similar challenge with his nomination of Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). He could've made a recess appointment this month after the Senate returned Becker's nomination to him. Instead, it is rumored that he will reappoint his man in hopes that he can get a full appointment. Obama must know, deep down, that both the House and the Senate will no longer be Bush-whacked after the 2010 elections (see Massachusetts, Tuesday's election results) and figures this is his only chance to get a full appointment.
If he does get a full appointment, Becker and his cronies on the Democratic side (the NLRB is normally split 3-2 in favor of the ruling party) can outdo the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) via bureaucratic fiat–with nary a vote by any elected representative. It would then take a lengthy trail of court challenges, ultimately leading to the Supreme Court, to undo the NLRB ukazes. By then, the Dems will no doubt have long faded into the haze of their own excesses and the Repubs will be back in power. In the meantime, all hell could/would break loose on the labor front, with (among other NLRB-issued decrees):
- The time-frame for union elections drastically reduced to a week or 10 days;
- The silencing of employers during the unionization process;
- Increased (and onerous) fines for interfering in the organization process;
- A mandate to provide organizers with names, addresses and phone numbers of all employees and free access to company facilities to speak to employees about unionization:
- Or, the final trump card–organization by card check with signatures certified by a "neutral" third-party examiner.
EFCA, who needs it when you have Craig Becker and company?
