Politicians Pledging to Back Right to Work Take Charge of House

Thanks in significant part to the efforts of National Right to Work Committee members across the country, starting this month the U.S. House of Representatives will be led by a speaker and a majority leader who have pledged full support for Americans’ Right to Work without being forced to join or pay dues to a union.

Now Committee members’ job is to make sure Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), and other members of Congress turn their pro-Right to Work promises into action.

John Boehner, Eric Cantor Owe Leadership Posts to Worker-Freedom Advocates

Mr. Boehner and Mr. Cantor enjoy their top leadership positions in the House in part due to pro-Right to Work Americans’ support for congressional candidates nationwide who had pledged to oppose compulsory unionism.

Millions of pro-Right to Work Americans mobilized against candidates who supported compulsory unionism, or tried to hide their position on freedom in the workplace. These Americans expect Mr. Boehner and Mr. Cantor to lay the foundation for a new federal labor policy respecting each employee’s ability to decide for himself or herself whether or not to join or financially support a union, declared Committee President Mark Mix.

“Poll after poll shows nearly four out of five Americans who regularly vote support the Right to Work,” explained Mr. Mix.

“When these citizens helped John Boehner and Eric Cantor become the new House leaders, they sent an unmistakable message to Capitol Hill — roll back Organized Labor’s compulsory-unionism privileges.”

In the 2010 elections, voters firmly rejected major Big Labor power grabs such as the “card check” forced-unionism bill, which sailed through the House as recently as 2007 and seemed close to becoming law in early 2009, after Barack Obama became the 44th U.S. President.

Momentum Swings Toward Right to Work

A full-fledged Committee effort to get federal candidates on the record against the “card check” bill, or “Employee Free Choice Act,” as proponents cynically mislabeled it, surpassed expectations in mobilizing citizens and increasing the number of Right to Work supporters in Congress.

To activate Right to Work supporters, the Committee distributed a record-smashing total of nearly 8.4 million federal candidate Survey 2010 “information packets” through the U.S. Postal Service last year. Above and beyond that, the 2010 program had a massive Internet component, including nearly half a million e-mails transmitted in October alone. All this plus radio, TV, and newspaper advertising.

Lobbying by Committee members persuaded hundreds of House and Senate candidates to take a pro-Right to Work position, which in turn helped many get elected. That’s not surprising, given the Right to Work principle’s overwhelming public support.

“The political momentum is now against compulsory unionism,” commented Mr. Mix.

“That means in this Congress the Committee actually has a chance, if members keep up the pressure, to pick up enough votes from the ‘mushy middle’ to push pro-Right to Work legislation through the House.”

Committee Pushes For Floor Votes

“Instead of just fending off repeated Big Labor attempts to wipe out the meager protections for workers’ freedom as individuals in current federal labor law, Right to Work advocates are ready to go on the offensive in Congress,” Mr. Mix continued.

“This year, it won’t be enough for self-avowed Right to Work allies on Capitol Hill to oppose union-boss legislation. Pro-Right to Work Americans want the politicians they supported to help them regain the freedoms Congress has previously abrogated.”

According to Mr. Mix, Committee supporters will know the new House leaders are truly committed to fulfilling the pledges they, along with many other House candidates, made if they ensure hearings and floor votes on legislation such as:

The National Right to Work Act, which would restore millions of employees’ freedom to hold a job without being forced to pay union dues by repealing compulsory-unionism authorizations in federal law. (For more information, see page four.)

The Rewarding Achievement and Incentivizing Successful Employees (RAISE) Act, which would reform federal labor law by narrowing the scope of union bosses’ monopoly-bargaining privileges. Specifically, the RAISE Act would allow unionized employers to pay individual employees more than a union contract calls for without having to get union bosses’ permission first.

Mr. Boehner Will Need To Hear From Right to Work Supporters

While freedom-loving Americans are hopeful that Speaker Boehner will make good on his 2010 campaign pledges to defend the Right to Work, history indicates pressure from Committee members may well be necessary to keep him on the correct course.

One notable example Mr. Mix recalled was then-Minority Leader Boehner’s decision in the summer of 2007 to give Big Labor Democrats a de facto free pass on legislation federalizing government union bosses’ monopoly-bargaining privileges over state and local public-safety officers.

“When union lobbyists rammed the so-called ‘Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation’ Act through the House in July 2007, the GOP House leadership team failed even to send out an e-mail urging caucus members to oppose the scheme until an hour before the floor vote,” Mr. Mix pointed out.

“Since the House was in session when the last-minute e-mail was finally transmitted, many of Mr. Boehner’s caucus members likely did not even know their leaders were opposed to the public-safety union power grab until after it had already been rubber-stamped by the chamber.

“Fortunately, thanks to Committee members’ determined efforts, this destructive legislation never became law. [See page eight for more information.] Nevertheless, this incident reminds us that Right to Work mobilization is always necessary, regardless of who holds the congressional reins.

“That’s why we will need to watch closely to see if Speaker Boehner allows the Right to Work Bill and the RAISE Act to get fair consideration. I’m confident Committee members will be willing and able to let Mr. Boehner know they want action on these bills.”

Tough Battles Ahead For Right to Work Committee And Its Members

The substantial Right to Work gains in the 2010 elections are encouraging, but freedom-loving citizens must keep their eyes wide open, Mr. Mix cautioned.

“Previous U.S. House speakers like Newt Gingrich [R-Ga.] and Dennis Hastert [R-Ill.] also made campaign pledges to defend the Right to Work, but avoided confrontations with Big Labor once Congress was in session,” he noted.

“However, despite all the pitfalls ahead, if Committee members and supporters remain mobilized, the 112th Congress could be a historic turning point in favor of Right to Work.”

Mr. Mix urged Committee members to call their U.S. representatives at 202-225-3121 (or my e-mail through the Committee’s Website) and urge them to support pro-Right to Work legislation every chance they get. Just ask for your representative by name.

As Big Labor has realized it won’t get “card check” legislation through Congress, it is turning to its secret weapon inside the Obama Administration—labor lawyer Craig Becker. And as many Senators feared when he was nominated, Mr. Becker is using his position on the National Labor Relations Board to bypass the will of Congress.

President Obama gave Mr. Becker a recess appointment in March after Senate Democratsrefused to confirm him to the NLRB, the agency charged with fairly overseeing union elections. As a top lawyer for the Service Employees International Union, Mr. Becker had suggested that the NLRB has the legal authority to impose card check—which eliminates secret ballots in union elections—without the approval of Congress. And lo, at the end of August the NLRB dropped the bombshell, when, in a 3-2 decision, it decided to revisit its important 2007 Dana Corp. ruling.

Card check is a top labor priority because it allows a workplace to be organized if 50% of workers at the site sign a union card. Without a national law, unions have tried to persuade individual businesses to allow card check rather than secret ballots, and some have gone along.

When a workplace is organized after a secret ballot, workers are barred from a vote to “decertify” the union until after the first negotiated contract expires. In its Dana decision, however, the NLRB recognized that card check was an inferior substitute to secret ballots. It therefore held that when a company recognized a union via card check, workers had the right to force an immediate secret vote on whether they really wanted to join that union.

The Dana ruling is about protecting workers from union harassment. And if card check is as popular as unions claim, labor leaders should have no problem letting workers vote to ratify or reject a card-check process. As NLRB member Peter Schaumber, a Bush appointee, noted in his dissent to the NLRB decision to revisit the case, the Dana ruling has in no way chilled the current card-check process. [click to read more at the Wall Street Journal]

The president claims he is doing everything possible to create jobs while quietly handing Big Labor union bosses the tools they need to destroy jobs.

Katie Gage, writing in the Daily Caller, takes note:

Earlier this week, President Obama confirmed what small business leaders and concerned workers fear most: that he will spare no effort to achieve Big Labor’s goals.  The president admits that labor’s top priority, the job-killing, rights-stripping Employee ‘Forced’ Choice Act (EFCA), does not have the votes it needs to pass in the Senate.  And with his own words, the president acknowledged that he has unambiguously aligned himself with union bosses seeking to bypass Congress and cram their priorities down the throats of the American people.

“What we’ve done instead [of getting EFCA passed in the Senate] is try to do as much as we can administratively to make sure that it’s easier for unions to operate and that they’re not being placed at an unfair disadvantage,” Obama said.

If Republicans win the House or Senate, big labor will call in their final chit and demand passage of the Card Check Forced Unionism bill and Boss Trumka isn’t denying it:

On the C-SPAN “Newsmakers” show he was asked whether the Employee Free Choice Act will be considered in Congress this year.Trumka said: “I think you’ll see the Employee Free Choice Act come up again. I think you’ll see it probably before the end of the year.  Before the elections or in a lameduck session? Trumka: “Either one.”

(Source: May 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

Nationwide unemployment hovers near 10%.  (U.S. DOL reports unemployment rate of 9.9% for April 2010) Across America today, there is widespread hardship resulting from most businesses’ lingering inability to hire more workers profitably even as the country emerges from the 2008-2009 recession.

What is the response of Big Labor politicians in Washington, D.C.? Sadly, they appear determined to make matters worse.

Last month, union-label U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill (Mo.) admitted to the Hill, a D.C. Beltway publication, that she and other members of her chamber’s Democratic majority were working behind the scenes to concoct an “alternative” version of the mislabeled “Employee Free Choice Act” for floor action this year.

In its current form, this legislation (S.560/H.R.1409) is designed to help union bosses sharply increase the share of all private-sector workers who are under union monopoly control by effectively ending secret-ballot elections in union organizing campaigns.

However, the National Right to Work Committee and its allies have mobilized massive public opposition to the measure, greatly lowering its prospects for passage in its current form.

Monopoly Unionism Negatively Correlated With Private-Sector Job Growth

In response, as Ms. McCaskill recently acknowledged, Big Labor politicians and union lobbyists are now concocting new legislation designed to accomplish the same objective through somewhat different means.

“The Committee and its 2.5 million members have led the opposition to S.560/H.R.1409, because this scheme would greatly exacerbate the harm caused by the current forced-unionism provisions in federal labor law,” commented Right to Work Vice President Doug Stafford.

“The ‘Plan B’ forced-unionism expansion legislation now being hammered out by Big Labor Sen. Tom Harkin [D-Iowa] and cohorts like Claire McCaskill would greatly intensify workplace elections’ bias in favor of union organizers. In the end, it could prove even more harmful than ‘Plan A.’

“And experience indicates enactment of either ‘Plan A’ or ‘Plan B’ would drastically reduce employment opportunities in addition to taking away the freedom of now-independent workers.

“For example, as a group, the 10 states with the highest shares of their private-sector employees under union monopoly-bargaining in 2004 suffered a private-sector job decline of 2.5% over the following five years.

“Meanwhile, the 10 states with the lowest private-sector unionization experienced an aggregate private-sector job gain of 1.9%.

“Incredibly, the avowed goal of S.560 lead sponsor Harkin and other Big Labor politicians in Congress is to ‘level the playing field’ by bringing all states down to the level of forced-unionism strongholds like Illinois, Michigan, and New Jersey.”

Union Bigwigs Calculate ‘Plan B’ Can Muster Necessary 60 Senate Votes

Mr. Stafford continued: “Rewriting federal labor law to make Texas’s private-sector unionization rate as high as California’s is today would certainly be a radical move.

“But union bigwigs like incoming Service Employees International Union [SEIU] chief Mary Kay Henry believe that, by dropping S.560′s ‘card check’ provision and modifying others, they can muster the 60 votes they need to bring up this power grab for a final Senate roll call.

“If that happens, it will be virtually impossible to stop the bill from being passed and sent to the White House.

“That’s why Right to Work supporters must not let their guard down.

“However, as long as Committee members and supporters keep turning up the heat on Congress with their postcards, phone calls, signed letters and petitions, I’m confident ‘Plan B’ as well as ‘Plan A’ can be defeated.”

Mr. Stafford urged Right to Work members to continue contacting their senators and congressmen through the Congressional Switchboard, 202-224-3121 and 202-225-3121, asking them to oppose S.560/H.R.1409 and all similar legislation on all votes.

From The Hill:  

McCaskill said that while senators were still negotiating the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), a controversial bill to reform union organizing rules, it was unlikely to even include the actual “card check” provision itself, which has been the subject of malign by conservatives and business groups.

EFCA was a top priority of the labor community heading into last year’s Congress, but the emergence of a series of Democrats to have questioned some of its provisions, along with timing issues on jobs and healthcare legislation, had left the bill on the backburner. 

“I think there’s a lot of negotiation that’s going on about card check,” McCaskill said.

Does Barack Obama want to wreck the American economy? That’s one obvious and troubling question raised by his recess appointment of Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board.

People who know anything about labor law are extremely worried about this decision. Appointing Becker to the NLRB is a bit like assigning the fox to guard the hen house — if chicken were an endangered species.

The president’s political calculus was simple enough. The union bosses wanted Becker, and Obama wants the unions’ support in the midterm elections. Becker is a lawyer who has represented both the AFL-CIO and the SEIU (and, by extension, ACORN). He is at the leading edge of radical labor opinion.

To wit, Becker helped to pioneer the idea of card check that unions so desperately want to pass. This change in labor law would effectively substitute the public clipboard for the private ballot box, which Becker has disparaged as being “profoundly undemocratic.”

Card check is deeply unpopular and is not likely to be passed by Congress, but Becker may have a way around that. He has hinted that the NLRB may be able to impose changes on the way unionization elections are conducted without Congress legislating any changes in labor law. He has also advocated that companies not be allowed to participate in NLRB hearings or contest election results, and that they not be allowed to have observers at the polls to challenge ballot fraud.

Becker wants this pro-union tilt to labor law because he believes that all Americans should be represented by unions, whether they like it or not. He has written, “Just as U.S. citizens cannot opt against having a congressman, workers should not be able to choose against having a union as their monopoly-bargaining agent.”

Congress saw that Becker on the NLRB would be a one-man card check bill.