Former Bush NLRB Chairman Robert Battista, joins union avoidance law firm

Who would have thunk it? Former Bush NLRB appointee now working for anti-union law firm.

For quite some time the NLRB has been favoring employers, now former Chairman Robert Battista can help exploit American workers, using laws he helped create.

According to American Rights at Work (5/5/08):

Breaking: Battista Now Busting Unions For Profit
Written by Erin Johansson

For years I've been writing that Robert Battista, former chair of the National Labor Relations Board, has been doing the bidding of anti-union employers by dismantling protections for workers under the law. Apparently, he's now going to be doing the bidding of anti-union employers and making a lot more money at notorious unionbusting firm Littler Mendelson (see a sample of their unionbusting strategies: Littler Mendelson’s Dos & Don’ts).

Battista asked Bush to withdraw his nomination as Labor Board chair, which was going nowhere, and joined the firm that John Logan of the London School of Economics called one of the "nation’s first law firms to conduct aggressive union avoidance campaigns."

Now Battista can make money telling employers how to exploit the law he helped to weaken in order to prevent their workers from organizing.

Heres some links on the NLRB in the Bush years

• Democrats say NLRB majority anti-union - USA Today (12/13/07)
  

"Today, fewer workers have fewer rights and weaker remedies under the National Labor Relations Act," said Liebman, who was appointed to the board by President Clinton. "Virtually every recent policy choice by the board impedes collective bargaining, creates obstacles to union representation or favors employer interests." Unions have protested what they call anti-union decisions from the current National Labor Relations Board. They particularly point to 61 decisions the board made in September they say hurt unionized workers.

"Since its installation in 2002, the Bush administration's labor board has embarked on a systematic and insidious effort to radically overhaul our federal labor law and its regulation of labor relations in the private sector," AFL-CIO lawyer Jonathan Hiatt said.

• NLRB sets window for decertification - USA Today (10/02/07)

If anti-union employees can get 30 percent of eligible employees to sign a petition within 45 days, an NLRB secret-ballot election will take place, the decision said.

"This is an encouraging step forward for employee freedom," said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation.

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation lawyers challenged the card-check system for workers at two auto parts suppliers, Dana Corp., an Ohio auto parts maker and Metaldyne Corp.,of Plymouth, Mich., who were organized by the United Auto Workers.

The NLRB, however, said its decision would only apply to future card check campaigns, leaving the Dana Corp. and Metaldyne Corp. employees as members of the UAW.

The board's decision will make it less likely that a company will voluntarily agree to a card-check campaign, said NLRB members Dennis P. Walsh and Wilma B. Liebman.

"An employer has little incentive to recognize a union voluntarily if it knows that its decision is subject to second-guessing through a decertification petition," the two wrote.

• Bush Re-Nominates the WORST NLRB Chair Ever - Unbossed (2/02/08) :

As Ted Kennedy said:

WASHINGTON, DC—Today, the White House announced the President’s intent to nominate Robert Battista and Gerald Morales to the National Labor Relations Board.

Senator Edward M. Kennedy said, “It’s unbelievable that President Bush would renominate Mr. Battista to the Board, after he led the most anti-worker, anti-labor, anti-union Board in its history. America’s hard-working men and women deserve a Board that will uphold their rights, not undermine them. With these nominations, the Administration has again demonstrated its hostility to fairness and justice in the workplace.”

• Marchers hit NLRB rulings by Bush-named majority - Labors Forgotten News (11/17/07)

"This is not the NLRB. This is George Bush's board. This is Dick Cheney's board. This is the Chamber of Commerce's board. This is the National Association of Manufacturers' board. And it sure as hell ain't the Labor Board!” declared Mine Workers President Cecil Roberts.

The marchers protested 61 NLRB decisions, virtually all by party-line 3-2 votes, starting in late September and continuing, that stripped away many workers' rights. They included rulings making it easier to oust unions through what are called "decertification petitions” -- rulings making it harder for workers illegally fired for pro-union work to get back pay, and rulings making it easier for firms to break labor law.

• Human Rights Watch Expresses Deep Concern about Recent U.S. National Labor Relations Board "Supervisor" Ruling Letter to Battista from HRW (10/26/08)

Human Rights Watch wishes to express our deepest concern that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decision in the so-called Kentucky River Trilogy violates United States obligations under international human rights law and international labor law. The decision announces an expanded definition of “supervisor” under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the main U.S. law governing workers’ right to organize. Under the new definition, employers can classify as “supervisors” those employees with incidental oversight over coworkers, even when such oversight is far short of genuine managerial or supervisory authority.

International Labor Organization condemns the Bush NLRB "Kentucky River" decision

From American Rights at Work (3/25/08) :

Bush Board Violates International Human Rights Principles

Written by Erin Johansson

In a rebuke of the Bush Board, an agency of the United Nations ruled that the NLRB’s decision to broaden the definition of supervisor was in violation of core international labor standards. The International Labor Organization (ILO) charged that three 2006 supervisor decisions “appear to give rise to an overly wide definition of supervisory staff that would go beyond freedom of association principles… [and] might lead to the exclusion of wide categories of workers from protection of their freedom of association rights.” In response to a complaint filed by the AFL-CIO, the ILO’s Committee on Freedom of Association Committee reiterated that supervisors are “only those persons who genuinely represent the interests of employers,” which is contrary to the Bush Board’s new definition of a supervisor, which includes those with “minor or sporadic oversight over co-workers.” The committee also expressed concern about the potential “clogging of the representation and collective bargaining process through an increase in appeals filed by employers with a view to challenging the status of employees in bargaining units.” The ILO committee recommended that the U.S. government take the necessary steps to ensure that only true supervisors are excluded from the protections of the National Labor Relations Act. The United States is bound to uphold international labor standards, including the freedom of association, as a member of the ILO. Are you paying attention, members of Congress? You have a chance to right this wrong.

This is commonly referred to as the "Kentucky River" decision

KS: State passes bill that will encourage more illegal immigration and punishes unions who try to help the workers

"There will be no punishment for law-breaking employers and they get the bonus of a state-sponsored tool for union busting." -Mark Desetti

Wow, if I didn't read it, I wouldn't believe it.

Kansas, a state in this United States, has passed a bill through it's Senate that will exclude punishment for the employers of undocumented workers, but would fine a union who lets the worker into it's ranks. You got that? They do not blame the employers, they want to stop anyone from helping the workers.

This is a tremendous blow to organized labor. This is a great defeat to workers in the United States. It encourages more slave labor. More criminal behavior. More dissension and confusion in our country. More separatism and division.

We are becoming a third world nation, and these multi-national corporations are dragging the entire world down with us.

From Kansas Workbeat :

Kansas Senate Votes to Punish Unions for Illegal Actions of Employers!
By Mark Desetti, Director, Legislative and Political Advocacy of the Kansas National Education Association

The Kansas Senate adopted an amendment by Senator Karin Brownlee (R-Olathe) to the immigration reform bill that would put responsibility for controlling illegal immigration on unions and other employee organizations.

Under the amendment any union or employee organization that would “impose or collect union dues from any alien who is not lawfully present in the United States” would be subject to fines from $2,000 to $10,000. The amendment was adopted in the wee hours on a vote of 19 to 18.

It is important to note that the Senators repeatedly rejected attempts to impose punishments on employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens. In other words, in Kansas, while employers are free to do whatever they want when hiring, employee groups will be punished for fraternizing with other employees.

This is a new low for the Kansas Senate. A majority of them are happy to turn a blind eye to the hiring of illegal aliens and will use immigration reform to bust unions.

So here is the scenario:

• An employer, knowing that he will not be punished for hiring an illegal, puts the illegal alien to work side by side with unionized American workers.
• The union, believing that the employer would not hire illegal aliens (that is illegal, you know), signs the employee up as a member of the union.
• The union is now subject to criminal action and fines even though the union has no ability to verify the legal status of a worker.

What a boon this will be to union busting employers! All they have to do is drop in a few illegal aliens, let the union recruit them, then make sure the union gets reported for collecting dues. The fines help to bankrupt the union and the employer gets off free and easy!

Brownlee argued that she was protecting these workers from “exploitation” by a union that had no intention of providing them with benefits. Oh, after the union gets caught “exploiting” the worker saved by this “protection,” the government can get about the business of deporting him.

This amendment – and the bill it is on – rise to a new level of hypocrisy. Senators who claim to want to stop illegal immigration into Kansas do nothing to remove the primary reason undocumented workers come to this country – jobs. Employers enjoy the benefit of very low wages payable to illegal immigrants and they lobbied hard to block any attempt to institute punishments for employers who knowingly hire illegal workers. They stand against minimum wage increases that would make jobs more appealing to citizens. And now their “pro-business” friends in the Senate have delivered. There will be no punishment for law-breaking employers and they get the bonus of a state-sponsored tool for union busting.

The site goes on to list those in favor and against, 19 Republicans voted for the passage, while 8 against. 3 Republicans did not vote. All 10 Democrats voted against the measure. Go there and see who doesn't deserve you vote in 2008

I applaud the 10 Democrats and 8 Republicans who stood up against this anti-union/pro-corporate Legislation. As you can see, most Republicans are absolutely not for the working class.

Not since the “Kentucky River" decision handed down by the Republican-dominated National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on Sept. 9th of 2006, which can alienate 8 million workers from being in a union, has there been such an Anti-Union ruling or law established in these United States.

This is the Third World War, the war against the worker.

Recent headlines about the Kentucky River decision "International Labor Organization condemns "Kentucky River" Decision"