Union bosses want to their unions to be akin to roach motels:  Easy to check in, but impossible to check out.

On Monday, National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Raymond LaJeunesse presented the perspective of independent-minded workers at the National Mediation Board’s (NMB) hearing on proposed changes to labor regulations under the Railway Labor Act (RLA) that would enable union organizers to corral tens of thousands of non-union railway and airline industry workers into union membership.

Unfortunately, the NMB — the government agency charged under the RLA with mediating labor disputes within the railroad and airline industries — voted 2-1 to consider dramatic changes concocted by the bosses of the AFL-CIO union and 30 other unions. The changes would dictate a new system in which just a majority of workers affirmatively voting in a union organizing election to impose unionization on the whole collective bargaining unit.  The current system requires union organizers to obtain the consent of a true majority of workers in a given bargaining unit to accept their "exclusive representation."

The Foundation’s vice president and legal director argued before the NMB that the proposed changes further stack the deck against independent-minded workers who must compete against Big Labor’s well-funded, professional organizing machine — operating across entire, often-nationwide bargaining units — to secure their right to be free from union boss "representation." The proposed scheme imposes a greater burden on employees who wish to refrain from union membership by forcing them to either take affirmative action to protect rights that should already be secure — or otherwise allow far less than a majority of their colleagues take away their independence.

Furthermore, Foundation attorneys also argued that the NMB needs establish a formal process under the RLA for workers wanting to remove a union as their monopoly bargaining agent as required under Foundation-won precedent in U.S. federal court.

To read the Foundation’s statement, click here.

UPDATE: On December 29, Foundation attorneys filed formal comments to the NMB. In them, the Foundation argued key four points:

• The NMB lacks the authority to make the proposed changes, only Congress does.
• The NMB’s application of the definition of what makes a monopoly bargaining unit makes it virtually impossible for independent-minded employees combat professional union organizers.
• Workers who have no interest in union membership are forced to take action to oppose the union bosses’ "representation."
• It is extremely difficult for employees to remove a union, especially so because the NMB has not established a procedure to allow workers to terminate a union hierarchy’s monopoly bargaining privileges.

For these reasons, Foundation attorneys argue that the NMB should reject the proposed changes just as they did as recently as 2008.  To read the formal comments, click here.