In a disturbing move that further underscores the Bush administration's mismanagement of the National Labor Relations Board, NLRB General Counsel Ronald Meisburg has inexplicably added activist Democrat Dennis Walsh to his staff in recent days. Walsh is a militant union-boss partisan who had just vacated an expired recess appointment to the five member NLRB -- a recess appointment that he should never have received from President Bush in the first place. Rather than receiving a make-work job within the bureaucracy while he pines away for yet another Board seat, Walsh should instead return to private employment. As a voting member, Walsh had worked to undermine employee free choice and to empower union bosses to coerce workers into union ranks. It's outrageous that he would be rewarded with a new post at Bush's NLRB.
Comments
"Burrowing-in" at the NLRB
Anyone who accepts the nomination or recess appointment of a President to serve as a Member or General Counsel of the NLRB should do so without expecting a future, permanent staff position and retirement benefits paid for by U.S. taxpayers a/k/a fellow citizens. When a term ends, leave. Burrowing-in is outrageous. Moreover, for an adjudicator/Board Member to be deciding cases already knowing that he/she has a future job with the General Counsel once his/her term or appointment ends is shocking. How can the adjudicator ethically participate in deciding a case where his/her future employer is a party to the very case the adjudicator is deciding. Burrowing-in has gone on from time to time with people of both party persuasions and they reside within their little burrows today. How does this happen? PURE ROTTEN POLITICS. It must stop now! Those individuals who burrowed-in should have the decency to quit. If they qualify for their current jobs, let them apply and be considered like anyone else. Having been a Presidential Appointee must not skew the presumed fair and objective process of filling vacancies for government jobs. Moreover, senior career officials at the NLRB should be mindful of their obligation to serve the public a/k/a fellow citizens, not pull strings for their personal favorites to further enhance and make permanent their raw power of IOUs. Yes, the NLRB needs to be flushed and scrubbed clean.
Unethical NLRB Member Action ?
NLRB Member Wilma Liebman was congratulated by a "professor" on the Work Place Prof Blog for her (literal) performance at the December 13, 2007 Congressional Hearing concerning the nasty, anti-labor, anti-middle class, apparently anti-everything "Bush NLRB" with the commentary title: "Give 'Em Hell Wilma." (Please view the hearing video on the House Committee's website to assure yourself that the following comment is accurate, truthful and worthy of an elected Representative's or Senator's action IF our Country and its elected Representatives truly believe in "The Rule of Law"):
First: The video shows/proves that NLRB Member Wilma Liebman literally read her answers to Senator Kennedy's questions to her (Kennedy read his questions to her as well). So, you ask? Well, it proves that the Democrat controlled hearing was scripted in advance (obviously with the participation of Jonathan Hiatt, General Counsel of the AFL-CIO, who also testified saying the same things as Liebman) to ensure that organized labor's agenda was dealt with properly and to its satisfaction (as one of the Democrat Party's financial backers hoping for a November landslide to cash in its IOUs to get its Employee Free Choice Act).
Second: For an NLRB Member, in this case Wilma Liebman, to participate in this hearing travesty is shocking and deserves/demands an immediate investigation. Why? NLRB Member Wilma Liebman continues to decide cases. The NLRB is an adjudicatory body. Although technically not an Article Three court, it is considered the same by reviewing courts and by the U.S. Supreme Court. The NLRB must be neutral in deciding cases interpreting and applying the National Labor Relations Act. It appears that Wilma Liebman violated ethical principles by participating in this scheme AND, most appallingly, Wilma Liebman's comments as read aloud by her in response to Kennedy's rhetorical questions PROVES CONCLUSIVELY her personal prejudices and biases regarding the very Act she is duty-bound to uphold AS WRITTEN AND ENACTED BY CONGRESS...not by her, Kennedy or the AFL-CIO. NLRB Member Wilma Liebman indeed gave 'em hell and her conduct/performance should be investigated (including investigating whether she participated in any meetings, phone calls, rehearsals and/or email in preparing for and/or scripting the hearing). Based on her hearing performance alone the question of her impeachment is obvious and action is necessary to ensure neutrality at the NLRB in the enforcement of U.S. law.