Are Congressional Republicans on a NLRB Witch Hunt?

American Rights at Work is a
great resource for more on the
NLRB proposed rule changes.

The House Committee on Education and the Workforce is holding a hearing this morning on the new NLRB proposed rule changes which would create more efficient, shorter elections and cut out much of the bureaucracy that plagues both business and workers during union elections. Catherine Fist, a professor of law at the University of CA-Irvine, said that the new NLRB rule is "modest and long over-due." 

Don't expect a fair hearing, though, from Republican Chairman Kline and Republicans on the committee; they've titled the hearing "Rushing Union Elections: Protecting the Interests of Big Labor at the Expense of Workers' Free Choice." Which should tell you something about whose side they're really on. (HINT: It's NOT workers' side. Anyone using terms like "Big Labor" is not on workers' side at all.)

Rep. Robert Andrews (D-NJ), ranking member of the Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions) said that "instead of talking about ways to put people back to work, Republicans are conducting another witch hunt against the NLRB." Rep. Andrews also mentioned that the Democrats were only allowed to have one witness at the hearing. Guess who Republicans have on the witness list? More than one witness - including a partner at anti-labor law firm Jackson Lewis. We're guessing he'll be totally fair and impartial.

UFCW Members Join with Other Workers in Indiana & Rally Mardi-Gras-Style for the Middle Class

UFCW Local 700 and Local 227 members, AFL-CIO members, Teamsters, AFT and NEA members, and many other union members and labor supporters came together at the Indiana Statehouse yesterday to rally for the middle class. Click here to see more photos from the event and from other recent Indiana rallies.

Activists held a fake "funeral" for the middle class, complete with coffin and New Orleans style jazz quartet. They marched around the Statehouse, dancing and singing and chanting, and lined up to testify about what the death of middle class jobs would mean to them. Students spoke about how they wouldn't have been able to go to college if their parents hadn't had good, middle-class jobs. Parents spoke about putting food on the table for their families, and taking their children to the doctor. Others simply spoke about their fears that their children's standard of living won't be as good or better than their parents.

After the "funeral," the middle-class was revealed to be very much alive and kicking. As one Indiana lawmaker said, "Reports of the death of the middle-class have been greatly exaggerated, and the crowd here today proves that." Workers and supporters marched out of the Statehouse to the rousing sounds of the jazz quartet, chanting about finding hope these last few day, about moving forward, and about keeping up the fight no matter what.

New Study Shows Employers' Anti-UnionTactics Have Increased

A new study illustrates what workers have known for years--it's become harder to get a union than ever, thanks to an increase in opposition to unionization by employers.

The study, by Kate Bronfenbrenner, director of labor education research at the Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor Relations, is titled “No Holds Barred: The Intensification of Employer Opposition to Organizing." The study was

based on a random sample of 1,004 unionization elections from early 1999 to late 2003 and relied on a review of National Labor Relations Board cases and documents, as well as surveys of 562 lead union organizers.

A similar study done 12 years ago found that employers used 10 or more types of anti-union tactics in 26 percent of unionization drives. Bronfenbrenner's study shows that 10 or more antiunion tactics were used by employers in 49%, or almost half of all organizing efforts. In 12 years, companies have doubled their efforts to oppose unionization among their workers.

The report includes confirmation that there has been an increase in more coercive and retaliatory tactics, such as:

plant closing threats and actual plant closings, discharges, harassment and other discipline, surveillance, and alteration of benefits and conditions.

And it shows that even workers who have the determination and strength to fight through may not be guaranteed a contract, since:

Even for those who do win the election, 52% are still without a contract a year later, and 37% are still without a contract two years after an election.

For most workers who've tried to get a union at their workplace, the report simply confirms the bitter truth they've been aware of for a long time--and demonstrates the increased importance of passing the Employee Free Choice Act.

When Joanne Fowler, a Certified Nursing Assistant at Lake Village Health Care in Wilmot, Ark.,and her co-workers tried to organize their workplace, management threatened workers with layoffs and tried to bribe workers with raises if they would vote against the union. She said that:

under the Employee Free Choice Act, it will be the workers’ free choice to organize. You won’t have to worry about the company threatening you.

At a briefing today on Capitol Hill to unveil the study, California Rite Aid worker Angel Warner, who is trying to form a union and get a contract with the International Longshore and Warehouse Union spoke out about anti-union tactics and intimidation:

We wanted to form a union so we would be treated with dignity and could speak up without fear of losing our jobs. Now we finally got through the harassment to form a union and we still don't have a contract. It shouldn't be like this. If my coworkers and I want a union, we should have one.