Worker Advocate Challenges Constitutionality of Obama's Controversial Labor Board Recess Appointments

Case over controversial NLRB posting becomes first legal challenge to Presidential attempt to make "recess appointments" without actual recess of the Senate

Washington, DC (January 13, 2012) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed a motion in federal court challenging the legality of President Barack Obama's recent purported recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

The legal challenge is part of a larger case attacking controversial new NLRB rules that require every employer to post incomplete information about employee rights online and in the workplace, even if they've never violated or been accused of breaking federal law. The NLRB's posting rules do not require union officials to issue information about workers' rights to refrain from union membership or opt out of union dues. Currently employers can only be required to post notices if the Board has ruled that a violation of labor law occurred.

The Foundation's case has been consolidated with other legal challenges to the biased NLRB notice posting rules brought by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW), and two small businesses. Those parties filed the joint motion today raising the issue of the NLRB's lack of authority to implement the rule given the unprecedented recess appointments.

The new filings in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia case comes after NLRB lawyers notified the court that President Obama's recent recess appointees were now parties in the ongoing legal battle. Under the U.S. Supreme Court's New Process Steel decision, the NLRB needs three members to act. However three of the five current NLRB members were installed by unilateral Presidential appointment earlier this year, despite the fact that the Senate was not in a self-declared recess.

In the motion papers, Foundation attorneys argue that the controversial appointees to the Board are not legitimate because the U.S. Senate is still in session per the body's rules, so there was no "recess" for the President to make appointments without Senate confirmation. Therefore the NLRB lacks the necessary quorum to implement the new posting rules. Foundation attorneys are asking the judge to rule on the constitutionality of the three recess appointees.

Read the entire release here.

Transcript Shows SC Boeing Employees Kept in Dark about Labor Board Sham Settlement

Washington, DC (December 14, 2011) – National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) documents show that workers who had intervened in the Board’s high-profile case against Boeing were instead shut out of the entire process by which the case ended with Boeing agreeing to locate production of its 737 MAX plane in forced-dues Washington State.

With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, North Charleston Boeing employees Dennis Murray, Cynthia Ramaker, and Meredith Going, Sr. moved to intervene in the NLRB's unprecedented case targeting the company for locating production of some of its 787 Dreamliner airplanes in South Carolina, in part due to its popular Right to Work law. In Right to Work states, workers cannot be compelled to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment.

An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) originally denied the workers' request but was forced by the NLRB in Washington, D.C., to allow them to participate as partial intervenors in the case.

The transcript of the hearing ending the case in which NLRB, Boeing, and International Association of Machinist (IAM) union lawyers participated show that the workers were explicitly shut out of the proceedings. According to the transcript, the judge acknowledged that he had "finessed" the workers out of the process, which occurred without any notice to the workers.

Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work, issued the following statement in the wake of the hearing's revelations:

"The Obama Labor Board has set a dangerous precedent that will allow union bosses to bully job providers not to locate jobs in states with Right to Work protections for their workers, thus forcing more workers into union-dues-paying ranks, or face costly legal action.

"Boeing, IAM, and NLRB lawyers' transparent ploy to sweep the South Carolina workers under the rug once again shows that the Obama NLRB puts union boss priorities above the rights and well-being of individual employees.

Read the entire release here.

The October/November issue of the Foundation's bimonthly newsletter is now available online.

In this issue:

• Obama NLRB Exceeds Legal Authority in Payback to Big Labor
• Foundation Overturns Union Schemes that Forced Nonunion Workers to Subsidize Big Labor's Radical Political Agenda
• Beyond Boeing: The Obama Labor Board's Forced-Unionism Agenda
• Connecticut Police Officer Wins Forced Dues Refund
• NLRB Shreds Secret Ballots after Overturning Landmark Foundation-won "Card Check" Precedent
• National Right to Work Labor Day News Round-Up

To view the October/November issue of Foundation Action in full screen, click on the viewer below. Use the left and right arrows to flip from page to page and click on any page to zoom in. Press ESC after you have finished to return to this screen.

Or, to download the newsletter as a PDF, please click here.

Right to Work President Mark Mix issued a statement commemorating Labor Day and warning of looming Big Labor power grabs. You can listen to the statement using the embedded player below, download an .mp3 recording here, or read the statement here.

Worker Advocate Denounces NLRB Rule Designed to Push Workers into Compulsory Unionism

National Right to Work Foundation President criticizes Labor Board’s decision to selectively publicize workers' rights

Washington, DC (August 25, 2011) – Today, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) implemented new rules governing the notification of employee rights in the workplace.

Until these changes, employers were required to post notices of workers' rights only if a violation of labor law occurred. However, the new rules require every employer to post incomplete information about employee rights online and in the workplace, even if they've never committed a violation or been accused of unfair labor practices. Meanwhile, union officials are not required to issue information about workers' rights to refrain from union membership or opt out of union dues.

Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation – a charitable organization that provides free legal assistance to employees nationwide – made the following statement regarding the new rules:

"The NLRB's new rules are just the latest example of the Obama Labor Board’s biased approach to administering labor law.

"Just as the Obama administration promises to lessen the job-destroying weight of federal regulations, Obama's NLRB comes out with a new 'posting rule' to saddle every business – from ‘mom and pop' stores to IBM – with new mandatory posting requirements designed solely to grease the skids for more forced unionism."

Read the entire release here.

Worker Advocate Blasts Labor Board Ruling to Allow Charleston Workers Minimal Say in Boeing Case

Big Labor watchdog slams ruling as insufficient; ploy to quietly sweep workers’ stories under the rug

Washington, D.C. (June 20, 2011) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Washington, D.C. has ruled three Charleston-area Boeing Company (NYSE: BA) employees are allowed to intervene, albeit minimally, in the NLRB’s high-profile case against Boeing.

With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, North Charleston Boeing employees Dennis Murray, Cynthia Ramaker, and Meredith Going, Sr. filed a motion earlier this month to intervene in the NLRB's unprecedented case targeting the company for locating production of some of its 787 Dreamliner airplanes in South Carolina, in part due to its popular Right to Work law.

An NLRB Administrative Law Judge in San Francisco denied the workers' request and the workers were forced to file an emergency appeal with the national Board in Washington, D.C. The Board in D.C. has ruled that the employees can only file a brief in the case once the hearings, occurring in Seattle, Washington, are concluded.

Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work, issued the following statement in the wake of the Board's ruling:

"The Obama Labor Board is poised to set a dangerous precedent that would allow union bosses to dictate to job providers where to locate their jobs with the aim, of course, of avoiding states with Right to Work protections for their workers and forcing more workers into union-dues-paying ranks.

"The public outcry regarding the NLRB's renegade, pro-forced-unionism actions – spearheaded by the NLRB's Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon – thus far has forced the NLRB to try to save face, but the ruling still leaves much to be desired.

Read the entire release here.

For more information, visit http://www.nrtw.org/boeing.

South Carolina Boeing Employee Hits Machinist Union with Federal Charge for Illegal Retaliation

Machinist union bosses expelled from workplace trying to eliminate workers’ jobs in retaliation

Washington, DC (June 15, 2011) – A Charleston-area Boeing Company (NYSE: BA) employee has filed a federal unfair labor practice charge against the union behind the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) high-profile case against Boeing. The employee filed the charge with the NLRB regional office in Wilmington, North Carolina on Wednesday with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation.

The charge is in response to the International Association of Machinists (IAM) union and its Local 751 abusing federal labor policy – which is supposedly intended to help workers protect their rights – to bully Boeing for locating a new production line for 787 Dreamliner airplanes in South Carolina, partly because South Carolina is a Right to Work state.

The charge spells out how IAM union bosses are retaliating against the South Carolina employees by abusing the legal process to attempt to eliminate the jobs of over 1,000 Boeing employees in the Charleston area after the workers at the Dreamliner plant expelled the IAM from their workplace before the production line was located there.

The IAM Local 751 union's charges – which spurred NLRB Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon to file a complaint against Boeing – would eliminate over 1,000 existing jobs in South Carolina if successful, not to mention several thousand more jobs that would be created once the Boeing plant reaches full production capacity.

Read the entire release here.

For more information, visit http://www.nrtw.org/boeing.

Obama NLRB to South Carolina Boeing Employees: "You Have No Stake in Your Jobs"

National Right to Work Foundation attorneys continue to help workers save their jobs from union boss power grab

Washington, DC (June 9, 2011) – A National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Administrative Law Judge in San Francisco denied three Charleston-area Boeing employees' request to intervene in the NLRB's high-profile case against Boeing Company (NYSE: BA). The judge also denied the employees’ request to file an amicus curiae brief in the case.

With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, the group of North Charleston Boeing employees whose jobs are in jeopardy sought to have their say in the NLRB's unprecedented case targeting Boeing for locating production in South Carolina in part due to its popular Right to Work law.

The NLRB's complaint, if successful, would eliminate over 1,000 existing jobs in South Carolina, not to mention several thousand more jobs that would be created once the Boeing plant reaches full production capacity. Further, the case could set a dangerous precedent that gives union officials a new tool to dictate where job providers locate their facilities.

Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work, issued the following statement in the wake of the judge’s ruling:

"It is unbelievable that the judge bought the General Counsel's argument that the employees do not have a 'legitimate direct interest' in saving their jobs. This is yet another example of a misguided federal labor policy that favors Big Labor and Big Business despite the flowery language about employee rights.

Read the entire release here.

Worker Advocate: Obama General Counsel Opposition “A Bald-faced Lie of Weiner-esque Proportions”

Machinist union bosses join with NLRB Acting General Counsel to tell workers to “sit down and shut up” about losing their jobs

Washington, DC (June 8, 2011) – Yesterday, Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon, International Association of Machinist (IAM) union lawyers, and Boeing Company (NYSE: BA) attorneys responded to a motion filed by three North Charleston Boeing employees seeking to intervene in the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) case against Boeing.

The North Charleston employees are receiving free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. The NLRB’s complaint, if successful, would almost certainly eliminate thousands of jobs in South Carolina, including those of the three Boeing workers represented by Foundation attorneys.

Foundation President Mark Mix released the following statement in response to the Acting General Counsel’s and IAM union lawyers’ opposition to the employees’ motion:

“Acting General Counsel Solomon’s and the IAM union lawyers’ opposition to the Charleston employees’ motion to intervene in the NLRB’s persecution of Boeing is a slap in the face of all independent-minded American workers and citizens who support duly-enacted Right to Work laws in their states that protect employees’ choice over whether or not to financially support a union.

“Solomon’s argument that the South Carolina workers have no stake in the shutdown of the facility in which they are employed is a disingenuous attempt to silence workers whose very livelihoods are in jeopardy. This is a bald-faced lie of Weiner-esque proportions.

Read the entire release here.

South Carolina Boeing Employees Move to Intervene in Obama Labor Board’s Assault on Right to Work Laws

National Right to Work Foundation attorneys helping workers and former Machinist union president challenge attempt to send jobs to Washington

Washington, DC (June 2, 2011) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a group of Charleston-area Boeing Company employees are asking to intervene in the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) unprecedented case targeting Boeing (NYSE: BA) for locating production in South Carolina in part due to its popular Right to Work law. That law ensures that union dues and membership are strictly voluntary.

The NLRB's complaint, if successful, would eliminate over 1,000 existing jobs in South Carolina, not to mention several thousand more jobs that would be created once the Boeing plant reaches full production capacity. Further, the case could set a dangerous precedent that allows union bosses to dictate where job providers locate their facilities.

In 2009, Boeing, after experiencing repeated International Association of Machinists (IAM) union boss-instigated strikes in the forced unionism state of Washington, decided to locate a new production line for the 787 Dreamliner to South Carolina, partly because South Carolina is a Right to Work state. IAM union bosses in state of Washington cried foul and filed unfair labor practice charges against Boeing.

The NLRB's Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon sided with IAM union bosses and decided to prosecute Boeing in late April. Ironically, workers in Boeing's South Carolina plant booted IAM union bosses from their plant to attract the Dreamliner production, as the workers did not want union bosses interfering with their job prospects.

Boeing employees Dennis Murray, who led the effort to remove the union from the Charleston plant; Cynthia Ramaker, the former president with the local union which was removed from the plant; and Meredith Going filed their motion to intervene in the case with the NLRB regional office in Seattle, where the NLRB's case is pending.

Read the entire release here.

To read the employees' motion to intervene and their personal declarations supporting the motion, click here (pdf).