Why the NLRB Should Be Abolished

Here's an email from an NLRB Agent to a colleague of mine:

In Case 21-CA-38181 it is alleged that the Employer violated Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the Act by harassing, coercing, discrimination against, and threatening an off-duty employee because the employee supports the Union. Specifically, the Union alleges that the Employer summoned a security guard to harass a Union employee, and the guard, with a dog by his side, threatened the Union employee.

The Region has authorized dismissal, absent withdrawal on this allegation. The investigation failed to reveal that the guard made any threats (or statements for that matter) to the employee. There is no evidence that the dog made any motion or threatening gesture toward the employee. Finally, there is no evidence supporting a Section 8(a)(3) violation.

I Am Not Alone

Members of the AFSCME Executive Board (7 of 33) have written an open letter to AFSCME President Gerald McEntee asking him to refrain from attacking Senator Obama and using union funds/staff to engage in public disparagement of the Senator. Noteworthy, to me, is the admission that AFSMCE endorsed Clinton primarily because they expected her to be the front runner, and wanted to back the right horse, so to speak.

This bolsters my view that Labor's beef with Obama is not that he's anti-union, but that he ain't getting bought by Labor. If we can get his support for free, then why are we begging him to take our money?

The flip side, i.e. Labor's argument, is that Obama is taking $2300 from every rich person he meets, but that teachers, firefighters, and home care workers don't have that kind of money. Unions can pool their members' money to support candidates that support issues for working people. It's an argument, but that's all it is. It isn't borne out by the practice. Politicians take money from unions, AND from rich people, and then do what they do. I think its worth trying a different way for once.

UPDATE: It looks like the members of Culinary workers local 226 agrees with me.

Everyone's A Pundit

I had an irksome conversation with a law clerk in our office the other day where he expressed doubt that Obama even supports the Employee Free Choice Act (this legislation proposes to strengthen union organizing, and it’s a no-duh Vote Yes for Democrats). The law clerk has “inside knowledge” that Obama is not pro-union.

Obama does, in fact, support EFCA, and other pro-union, pro-working people solutions. At least, he says he does. And he did co-sponsor the damn bill in the Senate. So I did a tiny amount of research to figure out why Labor people think Obama is "the most conservative candidate on the Democratic side", at least on labor issues.

Most of the web/news coverage concerns Obama's almost-perfect record on labor issues or the fact that Obama has called out Clinton on NAFTA/CAFTA and Edwards on his refusal to condemn the right-to-work law in NC. Not exactly a right-wing smoking gun, if you ask me.

When I dug a little deeper, I found what may be the problem: Obama sent out a campaign letter where he seems to have called unions (and Emily's list) "special interests", and eschewed 527 organization's funds. DailyKos took issue (in a post that is reminiscent of the AFSCME video I posted back in March), as did Working Life and Politico.

Help me out here. How is being against "soft money funding" the exact same thing as being "anti-union"? And since when did buying politicians do shit for labor unions? Labor has been paying through the nose for years for the privilege of getting shafted over and over again. Millions of members' dues are chasing after politicians who have failed to strengthen labor laws, appoint pro-worker regulatory bodies, raise the minimum wage, stop jobs from moving overseas or borders or improve healthcare.

Labor thinks the candidates' interests are their interests. So fundraising is what Labor cares about, because that's what the candidate cares about. They lash out at another candidate who says, I want to end that kind of fundraising - as thought that were a labor issue. It's not a labor issue, it's a political issue. They hope the candidates they spend for will reciprocate, but there's no real historical basis for that hope.

Just as with the Labor's occasionally retrograde environmental views, Labor is on the wrong side on the issue of campaign finance reform. They think being able to throw their money around gets them somewhere in elections, but the reality is, they are always outspent, always outgunned, by employers and industry groups, who have more money and far less scruples about how widely they distribute it.

So I am not persuaded yet that Obama is anti-union or anti-worker. Of course, for professional reasons, I can't really share this view with anyone in my world who might be able to contradict me, but I am infuriated that "my people" are acting like mini-Joe Trippis instead of worker advocates. I think that there's a lot of sour grapes about lining up behind the wrong candidate too early, another common mistake Labor makes. Let me know if you know something different....

More On The Writers' Strike

Except for the fact that folks are having to strike over such an obvious issue as revenue from new media sources, this strike is like a labor utopia for me. By the way, I want to mention that I do not represent WGA or SAG or AFTRA. I represent a couple of IATSE locals but none are impacted by the strike. Not sure whether representing one of those unions would create a conflict of interest but I wanted to give full disclosure.

Anyway, back to labor utopia. Driving home last night, I listened to 15 full minutes of labor coverage. Never in my life have I heard that much labor talk, none of it from a unionbuster, on NPR. The media feels such a kinship with WGA (I hope), they are giving them actual coverage. Its also in the NYT, Yahoo News, Google News, and The Recorder (CA legal news). And that's just the old media. You can find WGA on their own websites, on Facebook, YouTube and MySpace and probably some other places I have never heard of. It's awfully refreshing. Check United Hollywood for links to those places where you can learn more. And sign the WGA petition.

Oh, and if you still don't understand what this is about:

So *THIS* Is How It Works

In case you are wondering what old school economic weapons look like when married to "new media"-savvy workers, this Writers Guild of America strike may end up being the model. They have their own website, updating picket sites info regularly United Hollywood, lists of sitcoms that have shut down because actors won't cross picket lines or work while being struck, members blogging, Teamsters walking away from their trucks while gate guards have to unload them. It's very inspiring and cool.

Now if only there were more union members portrayed on television. . .

Writers' Strike and Other Thoughts

There's something about Hollywood that makes people pay attention in a way they won't when it concerns another industry. Here is a summary of the issues, and there are plenty of blogs chronicling the dispute (writers not working still gotta scratch that itch. See Undercover Black Man and United Hollywood, which has actual information for picketing writers. I expect Calitics will keep its eye on the strike, as will the mainstream media.

And here's a sexual harassment case I will not likely be sharing with any of my clients. In Coolidge v. Indianapolis, the Seventh Circuit found that the appellant was not sexually harassed by her former supervisor when she found necrophiliac pornography that he may have left behind. The Court found, among other things, that as a Crime Lab employee, exposure to such material did not have the same "shocking overtones" it might have in another setting. It recalls "the Seinfeld case", Lyle v. Warner Bros., where the Cal Supremes defined when it was okay to talk dirty at work. Now that I think about it, those alleged harassers are probably out on the picket line today.

UPDATE: 11/5, 3:20p - A writer was hit by a car on the picket line, per ABC News.

No $#!+

In what must be the least surprising news I have heard this year, researchers have found that employees "slack off" in response to abusive bosses. Once called "blue flu" (by police, and then broadly, public employees) or a "sick out", I wonder what will come of all this.

“However, it is clear that employee-employer relations are at one of the lowest points in history,” researcher Wayne Hochwarter said. . . .Hochwarter suggested that basic civility, including a commitment to active communication, could resolve many workplace problems.

Maybe.

Sad But True

The National Labor Relations Board Union is picketing Ronald Meisburg because of his refusal to bargain with them. The Federal Labor Relations Authority has issued a complaint against Meisburg for his refusal to bargain.

In case anyone thought the leadership at the NLRB still gave a shit about workers, there should be no illusions.....