By LaborUnionReport - RedState
Fluke? New Data Supplied By CRS Eerily Similar to NLRB Statements in February
For the last several years outside of union bosses themselves there has been no greater proponent behind the hallucinogenically-named Employee Free Choice Actthe failed bill that effectively would have killed secret-ballot elections on unionization in the workplacethan California Democrat Congressman George Miller. In fact going all the way back to 2003 Miller has introduced the job-killing legislation in the 108th 109th and 110th Congress where it finally passed the House in 2007 (but stalled in the Senate).
Since EFCA is effectively dead for the time being union bosses and their dues-funded Democrats are relying on the union-controlled National Labor Relations Board to unionize Americas workforce for them. However unemployment is still hovering around 9 and under-employment closer to 17 and we also have a national debt that is simply staggering. As a result Republican lawmakers are looking for savings in as many areas as possible. This includes $50 million from the NLRBone several agencies that is actively working to kill an already anemic economic recovery.
Despite the fact that the NLRBs caseload is considerably less than it was ten years ago the AFL-CIO as well as the union zealots who serve on the NLRB and Democrat George Miller are apoplectic over the proposed cutspresumably because the cuts throw a monkey wrench into their plans.
Following a seeming alarmist response from the NLRB to the proposed cuts made on February 18th for which House Committee on Education and the Workforce challenged the NLRBs claims (asking for the supporting data) the Congressional Research Service compiled data for the House committee which was dated March 15th. Interestingly the new" data was done nearly a month after the NLRBs assertions were made. Yet miraculously the data mirrors nearly the exact figures stated by the NLRB Chair and Acting General Counsel in February.
Why was new data compiled when the request was for data for previous assertions? Perhaps its just a fluke but could it be because the new Congressional Research Service data was compiled by analysts represented by a union?
The Congressional Research Employees Association is the labor organization representing more than 500 employees here at CRS. We have represented CRS workers since 1976 and maintain a 50 membership rate one of the highest rates in the Federal sector. CREA represents all workers in CRS analysts attorneys bibliographers clerical staff technical staff librarians and library technicians etc.
Perhaps as well it is only a coincidence that almost like clockwork George Miller jumped in with his own letter to the House committee stating:
The non-partisan Congressional Research Service explains that if the $50 million in cuts approved by the House of Representatives became law the staff of the NLRB would likely be furloughed anywhere between 58 to 64 days.
As you know the NLRB s mission is vital to enforce protections for American workers and private businesses under the National Labor Relations Act. According to the CRS reduced NLRB staffing could affect employers employees and unions."
It does make one wonder did Congressman Miller or other Democrats ask the CRS to pull the data?
Given the NLRBs effort to enact EFCA by regulatory fiat by issuing decisions that allows for employees to be threatened by union adherents gives unions the ability to undermine employee rights through sweetheart deals enables unions the ability to pepper employers with unfair labor practice charges in order to infringe on private property rights as well as the possibility of establishing multiple mini-unions in a single workplace it does make one wonder if something more nefarious is afoot.
Then again it could all just be a fluke…perhaps a coincidence.
As former Teamster attorney and current-NLRB Chair Wilma Liebman travels about participating in pro-union/anti-business conferences is there any reason to believe that the agenda of the NLRB is anything but pro-union and like their counterparts in Wisconsin willing to stoop to whatever means necessary to fulfill their agenda?
Perhaps $50 million in taxpayer savings is far too little to seek in the budget.
