After only a few months in office, the Obama Administration issued a controversial executive order that encourages federal agencies to use discriminatory Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) when allocating lucrative government contracts. For those of you unfamiliar with the term, PLAs give unionized companies preferential access to government work, which allows federal agencies to pressure unwilling employers to turn their workers over to union bosses. Fortunately, the first federal PLA issued under this executive order has just been defeated in New Hampshire:

Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) today announced that the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has canceled its solicitation for bids to construct a new Job Corps Center in Manchester, N.H. under a government-mandated project labor agreement (PLA). The cancellation came in response to a protest filed with the Government Accountability Office Office (GAO) by ABC member North Branch Construction . . .

As the Associated Builders and Contractors’ release points out, PLAs cut nonunion companies out of the bidding process, making federal projects more susceptible to wasteful union work rules and massive cost overruns. The Foundation has filed public comments opposing the use of PLAs with the Department of Labor. Although the DoL’s response has been marked by shady union boss maneuvering, we hope the Administration will take note and rescind its discriminatory executive order. (Of course, we won’t be holding our breath given how close the administration is to Big Labor).

For more information, here’s a CNN segment on PLAs that includes an interview with Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason:

Here on Freedom@Work, we’ve kept you updated about the Obama Administration’s payback after payback to the union bosses who spent over one billion dollars in 2008 getting Barack Obama and other forced unionism proponents elected.

From rolling back union disclosure guidelines to slashing the budget of the Department of Labor’s union watchdog agency to blacklistining nonunion construction workers from "stimulus" projects, the Obama Administration hasn’t been shy about rewarding union brass.

So Friday’s news about the White House’s visitor list isn’t exactly a shocker, but it says an awful lot about the Administration’s priorities: no one has visited the White House more than Service Employees International Union chief Andy Stern.

Stern, of course, is one of the nation’s most politically powerful union barons.  Under Stern’s reign, the SEIU has also been marked by scandal after scandal, dissatisfied and unhappy workers and union members, and vicious campaigns against workers and employers.

In The American Spectator, reporter Kevin Mooney interviews Right to Work experts about the hidden payoffs to union bosses tucked away in the thousands of pages of health care overhaul legislation. Here’s a sample:

Consider the language contained in section 2531 submerged deep within the House version. Here the bill stipulates that any participating health care employer "provides wages and benefits to its nurses that are competitive for its market or that have been collectively bargained with a labor organization."

"This phrase ‘competitive for its market’ is not defined," said Greg Mourad, the main author of the NRTWC study. "This means the Obama administration will be free to define the phrase using Davis-Bacon standards and this would make it almost impossible for non-union employees to qualify."

The approach is similar to what has been done with apprentice programs in federal construction work, Stefan Gleason, vice-president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, explained.

"This is a scheme that is used to fund union organizations that are supposedly doing job training but are often doing other activities," he said. "The scenario that is set up essentially bblack-balls non-union contractors from even being eligible to work on federal contracts at all. There is a similar strategy at work here with health care."

Read the full article here.

Fort Jackson Security Guard Takes Courageous Stand Against Repeated Union Boss Threats and Abuses

National Labor Relations Board agents investigate charges after Right to Work Foundation attorneys join worker’s efforts

Columbia, South Carolina (October 30, 2009) – A local employee of Wackenhut Services, Inc, a security service provider contracted with Fort Jackson, is fighting back against compulsory unionism after union officials illegally attempted to have him fired from his job for refusing to pay forced union dues.

In September 2008, Ronald I. Paul filed unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) challenging Wackenhut and International Union, Security, Police and Fire Professionals of America (SPFPA) and its affiliated Local 339 union bosses after Wackenhut fired him in August 2008 for refraining from formal, dues paying union membership. The charges were eventually settled in December of 2008 and Paul continued his employment.

Starting in May 2009, in violation of the settlement, the employer and SPFPA union officials issued new threats against Paul’s job.

(Read the full press release)

National Right to Work Committee Legislative Director Greg Mourad sits down with Breitbart TV to discuss Craig Becker, Obama’s radical nominee to the National Labor Relations Board. Click here to listen or use the embeddable player below:

The National Institute for Labor Relations Research (NILRR) has released a telling study comparing Right to Work states with forced-unionism states in a variety of statistical categories. The statistics, provided by various governmental departments and agencies as well as respected non-profits, show the stunning economic and personal benefits families enjoy from their states’ popular Right to Work laws.

The last five years of available data shows that workers in Right to Work states not only enjoy higher non-farm private-sector job growth (9.1% versus 3.6% from 2003-2008), but their real personal incomes are also growing faster (15.8% vs. 9.1% from 2003-2008) and they enjoy a higher disposable income ($34,878 vs. $32,811 in 2008) than their counterparts in forced unionism states.

Families in Right to Work states also benefit from lower taxes and are more likely to buy a home, send their children to college, and gain private, employment-based health insurance for parents and children alike.

While Right to Work is about employee freedom in the workplace, NILRR‘s analysis shows that rolling back coercive union power has undeniable economic benefits as well.

To view the full details of NILRR‘s report entitled "Right to Work States Benefit From Faster Growth, Higher Real Purchasing Power — 2009 Update," click here.

Today, President Barack Obama’s nomination of pro-compulsory unionism radical Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is scheduled to be taken up in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee.

National Right to Work President Mark Mix warns in today’s Washington Times of the grave dangers Becker’s possible confirmation will pose to workers’ rights:

When the union bosses have the NLRB in their fold, workers who try to exercise their legal rights to dismiss unwanted union monopoly bargaining agents – or even to stop their forced dues from being used to elect handpicked Big Labor candidates – are denied even the most basic protections.

That’s why, especially considering Mr. Becker’s record, it’s not a stretch to believe that – should he be confirmed by the U.S. Senate – Mr. Becker wouldn’t think twice about rubber-stamping even the most abusive forced unionism schemes cooked up by union militants.

In fact, as a former AFL-CIO and Service Employees International Union (SEIU) lawyer, Mr. Becker is solely responsible for forcing tens of thousands of workers under union boss control.

In one case, reports from a Los Angeles SEIU local union revealed that almost 63,000 people rejected membership in the union in 2007, but thanks to Mr. Becker, were still forced to pay dues.

And Mr. Becker’s own words explain why. He was even so bold as to say unions were "formed to escape the evils of individualism and individual competition … their actions necessarily involve coercion."

With that kind of anything-goes attitude, it’s no surprise Mr. Becker supports "home visits," in which union militants repeatedly harass workers at home until they sign union-authorization cards, and even advocates letting Mr. Obama’s handpicked arbiters impose contracts on workers, without even allowing the workers to vote on their own contract.

In fact, Mr. Becker is so extreme he actually believes the only choice workers should have is which union they should be forced to join and pay dues to!

In Mr. Becker’s view, if an independent worker refuses to pick, he and the rest of Big Labor’s lackeys on the NLRB should be able to choose a union for that worker. This kind of Big Labor kowtowing is not only outrageous, but it’s also dangerous.

To read all of Mark Mix’s op-ed in the Washington Times click here.

The alarming trend of politicians forcing workers into union ranks continues in Illinois as Governor Pat Quinn — in order to win Big Labor’s political support — is resurrecting the sordid legacy of disgraced Governor Rod Blagojevich (and Gray Davis of California) subverting workers’ rights to benefit forced dues-hungry union bosses.

Quinn recently signed an executive order arbitrarily reclassifying state-reimbursed in-home health-care providers as state employees — thereby opening them up to forced unionism under state law.  Service Employee International Union (SEIU) and American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union organizers, armed by the state with the addresses of Illinois’s nearly 3,500 in-home health-care providers, are competing to corral home health-care providers into compulsory union membership by going door-to-door to solicit support for their respective unions.

Pam Harris, a mother who stays home to take care of her son with special needs, was visited by two aggressive out-of-state SEIU organizers at her front door.  Understandably, Ms. Harris is worried that the Detroit-style labor relations that destroyed America’s auto industry could also destroy her right to care for her son as she wants. (To say nothing of the union dues she will be forced to pay for the «privilege.»)

Because she does not live in a state with Right to Work protections, if SEIU union bosses are successful in corralling all home health-care providers into forced dues membership, Ms. Harris will be forced to pay tribute to union bosses just to continue to take care of her own son — even if she refrains from formal union membership.

However, as many Freedom@Work readers may already be aware, this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Just last month, National Right to Work President Mark Mix reiterated in the Wall Street Journal NRTW’s previous warnings that union bosses are working to unionize the health-care industry and that under Obamacare, the very thing that is happening in Illinois will happen nationwide:

Following [the Davis/Blagojevich] playbook, pending government-run health care bills create a "personal care attendants workforce advisory panel" that will likely impose union affiliation on hundreds of thousands of folks like Ms. Harris to qualify for a newly created "community living assistance services and support (CLASS)" reimbursement plan.

Ms. Sebelius will be taking her marching orders from the numerous union officials who are guaranteed seats on the various federal panels (such as the personal care panel mentioned above) charged with recommending health-care policies. Big Labor will play a central role in directing federal health-care policy…

Though it doesn’t get nearly as much attention as other high-profile appointments, President Obama has recently nominated several new members to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a federal agency which oversees private sector labor relations and the federal policy of forced unionism.

These appointments have far-reaching implications for employee freedom, so it’s important that NLRB nominees are thoroughly vetted before they take office.

Unfortunately, Obama’s latest choice for the NLRB, Craig Becker, has radical views on the extent of union coercive power, and he comes directly out of the all-powerful Service Employees International Union (SEIU) whose bosses have been as thick as thieves with the notoriously corrupt Big Labor front group ACORN. Here’s The Wall Street Journal on Becker’s troubling history and his role in drafting Obama executive orders while on the SEIU union payroll:

One of Big Labor’s priorities in Washington is to place allies in key government jobs where they can overturn existing labor policy without battles in Congress. This is a very good reason for the Senate to hold a hearing on the nomination of Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Mr. Becker is associate general counsel at the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), which is most recently in the news for its close ties to Acorn, the disgraced housing shakedown operation. President Obama nominated Mr. Becker in April to the five-member NLRB, which has the critical job of supervising union elections, investigating labor practices, and interpreting the National Labor Relations Act. In a 1993 Minnesota Law Review article, written when he was a UCLA professor, Mr. Becker argued for rewriting current union-election rules in favor of labor. And he suggested the NLRB could do this by regulatory fiat, without a vote of Congress.

Read the whole thing here. As a member of the NLRB, Becker will be in a position to rewrite American labor law and achieve his stated goals of marginalizing employees from the process of deciding whether they are unionized. Allies of worker freedom should be extremely concerned about this nomination.

—

Previous Foundation coverage of Becker’s radical views can be found here, here and here. 

After President Barack Obama made numerous promises for a more transparent government, the Department of Labor (DOL) has, for nearly six months, hidden Big Labor insiders Hilda Solis and Deborah Greenfield activities from National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

Witnessing the Administration’s corrupt Big Labor political paybacks, the Foundation swiftly sprang into action requesting all documents showing exchanges between Labor Secretary Hilda Solis and union bosses and all documentation regarding policy enforcement concerning Big Labor, the pro-compulsory unionism group American Rights at Work, and ACORN.  The Foundation also seeks all documents showing communications between AFL-CIO union lawyer Deborah Greenfield and her former bosses.

Greenfield, a member of Obama’s presidential transition team, is a high-ranking official inside Obama’s Labor Department. One item sending red flags is the fact that Greenfield is an AFL-CIO lawyer in a lawsuit challenging DOL union disclosure rules — the very disclosures that the Obama Administration intends to end.  Greenfield and her fellow union partisans have fought for and succeeded in rolling back union disclosure rules that provide details to rank-and-file workers about the use and misuse of their forced union dues.

Freedom@Work readers may remember that the Foundation filed its disclosure demand (pdf) in April.  Foundation attorneys are now reiterating that demand and gearing up to litigate if necessary.  (To view a pdf copy of the appeal, click here.)

Upon entering office, President Barack Obama claimed his Administration would be transparent — but his Administration’s behavior has failed to keep the President’s word.  The Obama Administration’s delay in this particular raises questions that DOL may be attempting to cover up some embarrassing ethics violations.

You can watch the Foundation’s video regarding the original FOIA request here on our Youtube.com channel.