In the New York Times, columnist Joe Nocera writes how the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) unprecedented persecution against Boeing for locating additional production of its Dreamliner airplanes in South Carolina — in part because South Carolina is a Right to Work state — has changed the game for job providers:

It is a mind-boggling stretch to describe Boeing’s strategy as "retaliation." Companies have often moved to right-to-work states to avoid strikes; it is part of the calculus every big manufacturer makes. The South Carolina facility is a hedge against the possibility that Boeing’s union work force will shut down production of the Dreamliner. And it’s a perfectly legitimate hedge, at least under the rules that the business thought it was operating under.

That is what is so jarring about this case — and not just for Boeing. Without any warning, the rules have changed. Uncertainty has replaced certainty. Other companies have to start wondering what other rules could soon change. It becomes a reason to hold back on hiring.

When even the staunchly pro-forced unionism New York Times and its columnist most known for calling the Tea Party "terrorists" acknowledge the dangerous precedent President Barack Obama's NLRB is creating, you know there is a problem.

It's worth noting that the International Association of Machinists (IAM) union hierarchy actually enjoyed monopoly bargaining control of the South Carolina facility before the Boeing workers removed the union. If IAM union officials can retaliate against companies for locating work in a Right to Work state and against independent-minded employees for choosing to shake off union control, then the rules haven't just changed for job providers, but also for America's workforce.