By Fred Wszolek
When the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon released the agency’s fiscal year 2012 operating report, he provided even more evidence that the NLRB is over-funded and there is absolutely no legitimate need for the Board’s “ambush” election rule.
Less Work Should Mean Less Money
What are the facts in Solomon’s report? Just look at this fiscal year compared to the one before:
· Total case intake decreased by three percent;
· Unfair labor practice case intake decreased by 2.5 percent;
· Representation case intake decreased by 6.5 percent;
· Petitions filed in certification and decertification cases decreased by 5.7 percent.
At a time when more and more Americans are calling for fiscal restraint, this seems like an open-and-shut case for reducing the agency’s funding, which was increased substantially during President Obama’s first term, and which has been used to write rules and issue decisions to augment the power of union bosses.
No Need For “Ambush” Elections
Remember how Big Labor was complaining that union organizing elections take too long? And remember how the NLRB unlawfully forced through a rule on a vote of only two members that would impose “ambush” elections on America’s employers?
Well, as the NLRB’s own year-end report summarizes, union representation elections are in fact conducted in a remarkably timely fashion: “Initial elections … were conducted in a median of 38 days from the filing of the petition” and “93.9% of all initial elections were conducted within 56 days of the filing of the petition”
Clearly, we don’t need a rule to address a problem that doesn’t exist. So what’s really behind the NLRB’s push to rig workplace elections and make them so hurried that employees and employers don’t have sufficient time to discuss the facts and merits behind forming a collective bargaining unit? The answer is simple: With its membership declining, Big Labor has given more than one billion dollars to its advocates in the executive and legislative branches – starting with the President – and they are demanding “payback.”