Lest you wonder where this stupid idea came from:

"Business groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers have designated the vote a "key vote" - used to score members of Congress each year on their records."

These people are disgusting.

my understanding is that all this does is close loopholes which allow businesses to delay legally formed unions from inevitably becoming active. why do republicans want to create uncertainty in our already fragile business community?

thomps: my understanding is that all this does is close loopholes which allow businesses to delay legally formed unions from inevitably becoming active. why do republicans want to create uncertainty in our already fragile business community?

To force folks to oppose their handwringing to make it an issue around election time to spin it as being a ferocious fighter against union stooges...

Duh.

But I thought reducing government regulations was a GOP goal...?

TFA: "The NLRB has chosen to impose new rules to aid big labor at the expense of employees, small business employers and the jobs they would create," said Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming, top Republican on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

Maybe this is just my big-city upbringing talking, but how many small businesses use union labor? I suppose small-shop plumbers and electricians and the like, but it's my understanding that unions are more of a problem for big shops than small ones.

Also, "aiding big labor at the expense of employees" doesn't make much sense. The employees ARE the labor (unless he's alleging that the Union becomes an entity separate from the employees that comprise it - not out-of-bounds for a Republican to suggest, but ball-slappingly anti-reality for the rest of us).

Also, the NLRB is enacting rules that, by stature, they're allowed to, n'est-ce pas? Repeal the law creating it or STFU. The GOP really wants to howl and moan at every bending of the rules except theirs, eh? I'd say I'm unsurprised, but my lack of surprise is no longer surprising.

Cat Food Sandwiches: Shouldn't Congress make laws, not a politically appointed Board?

Regulatory boards, how do they work?

EWreckedSean: Especially considering the fact that as a non-union employee at my company, they are excessively generous with employment terms sans any union interference.

boy it's almost like there is a noted spill-over effect for white-collar workers employed at unionized companies...

EWreckedSean: Isn't it fair that many unions do become a separate entity outside the employees that compromise it? I would look for example at California where the unions tried to abolish secret ballots so that they could intimidate workers into supporting them. Unfortunately unions are a good example of a good idea gone to far in most cases. I know at my company, the stuff they hold up business over is ridiculous. Especially considering the fact that as a non-union employee at my company, they are excessively generous with employment terms sans any union interference.

Well, yes - the union is a separate entity for legal reasons (creating a placeholder entity for tax and liability purposes), but the decisions of the union are made by those same employees that have to punch a clock for 40 hours/week.

Like I said, I have little personal experience with unions. My grandfather was a member of the teachers' union, and sang their praises (and unions' in general) until the day he died.

thornhill: heinekenftw: EWreckedSean: Isn't it fair that many unions do become a separate entity outside the employees that compromise it? I would look for example at California where the unions tried to abolish secret ballots so that they could intimidate workers into supporting them. Unfortunately unions are a good example of a good idea gone to far in most cases. I know at my company, the stuff they hold up business over is ridiculous. Especially considering the fact that as a non-union employee at my company, they are excessively generous with employment terms sans any union interference.

Eh, unions are human, they can be good or evil. There is still a need for unions, though improved human resource management is reducing that need greatly, but at the same time, unions can be just as corrupt and morally bankrupt as the management they claim to protect the workers from.

Unions are a check on management power, but there needs to be a check on union power too. That's where the NLRB is suppose to come in.

Well said.

For all the complaints against unions, are they really any more self-interested than corporate leaders, such as everyone on Wall St whose greed caused the financial crisis, executives at places like Enron, or now everything we're finding out about Walmart?

Power almost invariably corrupts, and the only offset is to have multiple groups with power in competition with each other. An over-arching, disinterested authority should also be present to prevent collusion as much as possible.

Cletus C.: Unions are calling in their markers. Democrats are complying. Obama's NLRB is one of the most aggressive in siding with union interests.

This POS rule simply speeds up the process of unionization, limiting a company's opportunity to respond or argue its case against a union shop.

Pure politics. Unions own Democrats.

but...Republicans have said that government regulation is BAD. why are you against deregulation?

EWreckedSean: thomps: EWreckedSean: Especially considering the fact that as a non-union employee at my company, they are excessively generous with employment terms sans any union interference.

boy it's almost like there is a noted spill-over effect for white-collar workers employed at unionized companies...

Really, there isn't. The things the union negotiates for has nothing to do with my labor contract what so ever.

that's why it's called a "spill-over effect" rather than a "directly negotiated benefit."

qorkfiend: imontheinternet: An over-arching, disinterested authority should also be present to prevent collusion as much as possible.

Yeah, but how can you guarantee said authority actually is disinterested?

Ethics rules to prevent the authorities from having any skin in the game they're officiating, and an ethics board over that institution and presumably others to enforce the rules. Checks and balances- keep the watchers watching each other.

I realize it doesn't work that way in our actual systems due to rampant corruption and dysfunction, but the design itself is sound.