Blog

Hector Barreto
June 22, 2015

Fox News Latino

Using the power of the purse, Congress has taken yet another positive step to push back on the anti-business policies of the union-backed National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The House Appropriations Subcommittee this week took a stand against NLRB’s newly-enacted ambush election rule, which took effect on April 14, by slashing funding for the rule’s implementation. The subcommittee also took steps to ensure that the rights of workers to make informed, non-coerced decisions in union elections remain intact and that the overall privacy of employees is protected.

The ambush election rule was enacted by the NRLB in order to coerce employees to unionize in a short window of time, springing elections on unsuspecting employers in a little over a week. Previously, the window was, on average, 38 days between when a petition was filed to the election. Under the new ruling, however, the window is as few as 11 days.

NLRB data from past elections show that, from 2004-2014, unions won 86% of elections that took place under 21 days, compared to the only 60% that took place over a longer timeframe (36 to 42 days). The shorter the election window, the greater likelihood of unionization. It’s no wonder the union-driven NLRB wants to speed the process up; since union membership has been steadily sliding into decline.

The first month’s numbers are in, and as the business community warned, elections to unionize workplaces have sprung up at an alarming rate. From April 14 to May 14, there was a 32 percent increase in the number of petitions filed. This trend will likely continue, with the shortened rule encouraging unions to file petitions even when they think their chances of success are small. Employers have less time to hire outside labor counsel or educate their workers on the unintended consequences of unionization, and employees get confused when faced with coercion and misinformation from highly organized union campaigns.

Additionally, the NLRB’s new policy violates workers’ basic right to privacy. The rule gives blanket access to union bosses of everything from an employee’s personal contact information, home address, and job classification, to shift schedules and work locations. Union heads can now camp out on your doorstep, bullying you into the collective.

Fortunately, pro-business members of Congress have been working to stop these unilateral mandates from an unelected board. The House and Senate passed widely-supported, bipartisan legislation in March that would have rolled back the NLRB’s reach and prevented the ambush election rule from taking effect. Unfortunately, the legislation was quickly vetoed by President Obama.

This week’s actions to defund the NLRB’s new mandate represent the second attempt that Congress has made in support of workers’ rights (and they say they can’t get anything done!). Hopefully, Congress will be able to wield the power of the purse to sway the Administration to repeal the NLRB’s misguided policies that serve not to protect the worker, but to pad union rolls.

The efforts by the House Appropriations Subcommittee to defund the NLRB should be applauded, and the Senate should follow suit.  It’s time to stop an unelected board of union bosses and bureaucrats from deciding the fate of millions of small business owners and workers across the country.

Hector Barreto is the former administrator of the Small Business Administration (SBA).

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Hector Barreto May 14, 2015

Washington Examiner

Big Labor and the Obama administration scored a big victory on May 5. It happened when Senate Republicans failed to secure a two-thirds majority to override the president’s veto of legislation that would have reversed the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) “ambush” election rule.

The “ambush” election rule took effect on April 14, and with this ruling, union bosses — desperate to save their declining membership — now have valuable new tools to coerce and intimidate workers into joining their ranks.

The new rule will significantly shorten the window of time in which an election to unionize can be held — from an average of 38 days now to as few as 11 days after a petition has been filed. Shorter election times mean a much greater likelihood of unionization. Data from the NLRB show that from 2004 to 2014, unions won 60 percent of elections that took place between 36 and 42 days, but 86 percent of elections that took place under 21 days.

American small businesses, which often lack the infrastructure and support staff to ensure compliance with new and complex changes, will be acutely affected by the ruling. Employees now have much less time to educate themselves about unionization, while employers will be forced to submit a formal statement of position within seven days and will not be able to amend their statement before a representation hearing.

The new rules also eliminate an employer’s automatic right to a post-election review. Instead, employers are left to trust that the results are accurate and fair.

Union organizers can now approach any employee for their vote in unionizing the workplace without verifying that they are even eligible to vote. Incredibly, eligibility won’t be decided until after an election takes place.

These new NLRB policies also represent a serious violation of worker privacy. Union bosses now have blanket access to employees’ personal information, including phone numbers and email address, job classifications, shift schedules, work locations and home addresses. Employers can no longer protect personal employee information, and there’s no reason to think labor organizers will be shy about using it. In some instances, labor organizers have been known to camp out in front of workers’ homes to attempt to bully them into joining the union.

On the brink of irrelevance, labor unions bankrolled President Obama’s election and re-election campaigns, and now the administration is doing everything in its power to pay back its labor benefactors.

American employers can’t afford the aggressive, underhanded tactics made possible by the “ambush” elections ruling and other anti-competitive rules and regulations.

At a time of unprecedented global competition, and during an increasingly challenging and unpredictable economic environment, one would hope that the Obama administration would focus on supporting innovation and responsible risk-taking, while also standing by the basic rights of workers and business owners. Unfortunately, however, in trying to reward union bosses, this administration appears determined to pursue the exact opposite.

Hector Barreto is the former administrator of the Small Business Administration (SBA).

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.