Shop tools

Federal agency was used as a union weapon against Boeing

  • Follow Editorials

The National Labor Relations Board has no clothes.

Now that the Machinists union has agreed to terms on a new contract with Boeing, the NLRB has magically dropped its insidious, cynical effort to prevent Boeing from operating a plant in South Carolina.

Thus, the NLRB’s illicit motives have now been laid bare: The government agency was acting all along as a surrogate and tool for the unions, wielding the inestimable power of government to squeeze a company into submission.

It’s something more befitting Vladimir Putin’s Russia than a U.S. entity.

“Boeing pays its ransom,” lamented a Boston Herald editorial headline.

Hey, it’s just the cost of doing business under the Obama administration.

Blessedly, Republicans in Congress won’t just roll over and forget about the outrage – of government trying to hog-tie one of the nation’s biggest employers at the behest of a union.

Consider: If they’ll do this to a behemoth such as Boeing, who won’t they do it to?

“I’m glad the ridiculous complaint against Boeing has gone away,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., “but there are disturbing questions about possible collaboration between the Machinists union and the NLRB against Boeing. These questions must be answered.”

“The NLRB’s dismissal of charges against Boeing only after union approval of their new contract only confirms the charges were a politically-motivated negotiation tactic, not a serious complaint based on merit,” Sen. Jim DeMint R-S.C., added. “Unfortunately, real and serious damage to America’s competitiveness has already been done. A precedent has been set by the NLRB that they will attack businesses in forced-unionism states that try to create jobs in right-to-work states. Those on the NLRB board who led this attack on workers’ rights should resign immediately.”

They won’t, of course. Neither will the Senate, controlled by Democrats, deign to investigate the NLRB’s sleazy attempt at intimidation. It will be up to the Republican-controlled House – which already has its hands full probing administration loans to political cronies (Solyndra, et al.), the epically disastrous “Fast and Furious” federal gun-running scandal, a Justice Department that won’t come clean on Fast and Furious, the exploding MF Global scandal and more.

Ultimately, it will be up to voters next year to put an end to the thuggish, Soviet-style cudgelling of businesses that dare to create jobs in nonunion states.

The attack on Boeing was an attack on freedom, and therefore an assault on us all.

Comments (8) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 12/15/11 - 02:34 am
0
0
“But the NLRB’s general

“But the NLRB’s general counsel says that Boeing stepped over the line when its top executives said out loud what most companies only whisper in the sanctity of the boardroom — namely, that a significant factor in the move was the desire to reduce Boeing’s vulnerability to delivery disruptions caused by repeated strikes. The NLRB cited interviews with local newspapers, memos to Boeing managers and statements made by top executives to investors and Washington state politicians.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-answer-to-boeings-lab...

Did Boeing executives make public statements indicating their intention to move production of the 787 Dreamliner to avoid disruption of production by union strikes?

carcraft
27270
Points
carcraft 12/15/11 - 05:08 am
0
0
BJphysics- The editorial or

BJphysics- The editorial or comment you quote above does little to resolve the issue but does present a balanced view. The take home quote for me was " : The “right” for workers to strike without undue coercion from the company is hard to square with the “right” of the company to protect itself from the consequences of production disruptions. Both “rights” seem to have ample support in the case law." I think the NLRB went over the line far more than Boeing!

Chillen
17
Points
Chillen 12/15/11 - 09:45 am
0
0
Go away unions. And take

Go away unions. And take your thugs and money extorters with you.

JRC2024
9430
Points
JRC2024 12/15/11 - 10:39 am
0
0
Boeing and its investors

Boeing and its investors should be free to build a plant where ever they want to without regard to union or non-union. The government should never meddle in the affairs of a private business that is opereating legally. And to echo Chillen-go away unions because you are not wanted in the south and most other places.

Chillen
17
Points
Chillen 12/15/11 - 11:16 am
0
0
Young Fred, the laws are set

Young Fred, the laws are set up to protect the unions and hurt the businesses. Plus, it's darn hard to move an entire factory during a temporary production disruption.

I do know of one situation where a company was operating in a NE, union loving state. They had 6 offices throughout the state (not factories, regular white collar desk job offices).

The unions tried to infiltrate one of the offices (at the request of a few terminally unhappy women), so the company shut down all 6 offices and left the state - all within 2 weeks.

About 100 employees lost their jobs in that state - thanks to the unions and the idiots who called them in.

It was sad for the innocent staffers, but it was poetic justice for the unions and the losers who wanted them. They were left standing there with their mouths gaping wide open.

Riverman1
87512
Points
Riverman1 12/15/11 - 11:38 am
0
0
I'd just like to see them try

I'd just like to see them try a picket line around that plant in SC where those boys all have shotguns on their pick-ups' back windows.

dichotomy
34745
Points
dichotomy 12/15/11 - 11:52 am
0
0
It's a simple question with a

It's a simple question with a simple answer. Should a government entity be allowed to prevent a company from opening a factory in a certain state. The answer is absolutely not, under any circumstances. If this is allowed, a pro-union NLRB could make a blanket rule that no company can build a factory in a right-to-work state. This is a prime example of why we have to rein in the absolute power of non-accountable government agencies like the NLRB, the EPA, FDA, Dept. of Education, and others. Yes, they all serve(d) a purpose, at least at some point in time, but they have become self-perpetuating, bloated, and politicized to the point where the politically appointed leadership is usually a (insert flavor of the day) wing zealot who wields their uncontrolled, unaccountable, and non-elected power to further THEIR particular (insert flavor of the day) wing policies. Unfortunately there is no mechanism built into these agencies to force a balance in their policies. Individuals and businesses and the common interests of all suffer because of the knee jerk change of directions in the policies that come out of these agencies every time we change administrations. The only way to stop this is to restrict the power these agencies have to arbitrarily implement radical policies and regulations without approval from an elected body.....or to reduce their budgets to the point where there are not enough of the busybodies left to have time to be sticking their nose where it doesn't belong. That's what I would do.

Carleton Duvall
6305
Points
Carleton Duvall 12/15/11 - 02:48 pm
0
0
Young Fred, You show a

Young Fred, You show a remarkable capability of getting a handle on business and political matters. To say the least, I am impressed. All you need to do now is work on your difficulty in dealing with school authority matters. LOL.
From experience I can tell you that the NLRB is a tool used to further the gains of unions. Now, before someone jumps in and ask for a source to back up that statement let me tell you that no source is available. If there had been some left wing wacko would have seen that it was altered.

bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 12/15/11 - 04:55 pm
0
0
Under Bush many of the NLRB

Under Bush many of the NLRB board members were pro-management corporate lawyers; Bush appointed 7 board members (board size is 9) without Senate confirmation.

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/02/10/republican-warns-obama-no...

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs