Republican lawmakers who have expressed concern over the power and influence of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) have offered up some compelling proposals. Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.), the chairman of the House Education and Workforce Committee, has for example, said that he considering legislation that would block President Obama’s team of unelected lawyers from revamping union election rules.

That’s a good start, but Congress as a whole must move decisively to reclaim constitutional authority that was surrendered during the “Progressive Era” of the late 19^th and early 20^th century. Matthew Spalding, a particularly astute legal scholar with the Heritage Foundation, has testified at some length on the use of czars within the Obama Administration and how this relates back to progressive ambitions. In many respects, the NLRB fits with extra-constitutional schemes the disadvantage the free market and dilute the policy making authority of elected officials.

In June, the three Democrats who sit on the Board proposed rule changes that would curtail the amount of time for private union elections. Brian Hayes, the only Republican member of the board, has been sharply critical of the proposal, but his input has been limited.

If the rule changes go into effect, they would set elections from a current median time of 37 days to as little as 10 days from the filing of an election petition. They would also set pre-election hearings for 7 days after a petition is filed; the rules would also require the employer to respond to a pre-hearing questionnaire raising any legal issues or waive its right to do so. And finally, the new rules would defer a decision on the issues raised at the hearing till after the election, putting an employer at risk if the decision is challenged.

But free market groups have made a concerted effort push back and this is cause for encouragement.

(more…)

Looking to the 2012 elections, top operatives with organized labor say they are going to concentrate their efforts at the state level and will withhold their support for federal candidates. In the 2008 election cycle, unions spent almost $80 million on independent broadcast advertising, mail, and advocacy to either elect or defeat candidates for federal office, according to OpenSecrets.org. Federal records also show that labor union political action committees (PACs) contributed over $66 million to federal candidates in 2008, with 92 percent of this total going to Democrats.

But, this investment did not secure enough votes to pass the “card check” legislation and other policy measures weighted against the business community. So, a change in strategy is in order. Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Firefighters, told FOX News, his organization is eyeing the political terrain at the local level. But there is no reason for states, especially Right to Work states, to play defense.

Instead, they should follow the example set by Danny Martiny, a Republican state senator in Louisiana, who has introduced a bill to safeguard competitive bidding practices in the construction industry. In a pre-emptive move aimed against contracts negotiated between employers and unions before workers are hired, Martiny has introduced Senate Bill 76. This legislation prevents state government officials from mandating Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) on publicly funded construction projects.

PLAs call for construction contractors, including those non-unionized, to require their employees to be represented by a union on government-funded construction projects. In practice, they lock out non-union construction shops from the bidding process, officials with the Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC), a private industry group, have argued.

Although the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 generally prohibits pre-hire agreements, an exception in the law was created for the construction industry.

(more…)

By now you’ve probably heard that the president has gotten religion on the economically damaging effects of the regulatory state. Today, I argue wait and see is still the rule with this government as there are major rolls of red tape that President Obama would need to address coming from his own administration.

Specifically, consider the cases of how regulation impacts the ability and cost of hiring people. I point to OSHA overreach, the Davis-Bacon Act, new requirements that will have Americans chopping down entire forests to print 1099 tax forms, EPA regulation of carbon dioxide, and FCC regulation of the Internet.

And as they say in infomercials, “But wait, there’s more!” There’s oh-so-much-painfully-more regulation threatening jobs and the economy. Several groups track this sort of stuff, but take for example: Associated Builders and Contractors has offered a list of regulations that threaten the beleaguered and job-shedding construction industry. Take a look; it’s an eye-opener!

(more…)

In a victory for free labor, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has cancelled its solicitation for bids to build a new Jobs Corps Center in the state of New Hampshire. Why is it a victory? Because initial plans to receive bids would have discriminated against non-union construction companies per President Obama’s orders. Over 80% of all construction companies are non-union.

Executive Order 13502, signed early in Obama’s term, was applied to the New Hampshire construction project and instituted what is known as a Project Labor Agreement (PLA). A PLA is a way to force all companies working on a construction project to agree to union rules, dues, pensions and payments whether they are union shops and their employees are union members or not.

In effect, a PLA turns every employee and company working on a PLA enforced project into a unionized force. Naturally, this drives up costs, lengthens deadlines, and forces employees to fork over dues money even if they don’t belong to a union.

(more…)