With the Democrat dominated 111th Congress failing to enact legislation to stop Big Labor’s hemorrhaging membership numbers, the Obama administration enlisted obscure federal agencies to facilitate unionization and appease the Party’s biggest donors. While controversial considerations and rulemakings by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)—the federal agency charged with overseeing employer—union relations—have gone relatively unnoticed, the Board’s recent Boeing decision has propelled the agency to the forefront of political discussions.
Looking to increase production of its 787 model, Boeing first considered expanding its Pugent Sound, Washington plant. But before Boeing would invest billions in new factories and employees, the company wanted to ensure that their new factory, wherever it may be, would operate seamlessly and continuously. To achieve this prerequisite, Boeing required that a long-term no-strike clause be included in Boeing’s contract with its employees’ union, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM).
This was not an arbitrary request; IAM leadership in the Pugent Sound factory has encouraged Boeing employees to go on strike during four of the last five labor negotiations. A 2008 58-day work stoppage ended up costing the company $1.8 billion in lost earnings and left the company with a black-eye.
Boeing spent months negotiating with IAM leadership but in the end could not strike a deal with the union—IAM demanded that Boeing would place all future commercial airplane production in Pugent Sound and promise to remain neutral in all IAM nationwide organizing campaigns. Still needing to expand production, Boeing decided to open its new factory in North Charleston, South Carolina—a right-to-work state. Immediately after Boeing made its decision to build in Charleston, IAM ran to the NLRB claiming that Boeing’s move violated federal labor law. Last month, after more than a year of aggressive lobbying by IAM leaders, the NLRB’s general counsel filed a formal complaint against Boeing and seeks to force Boeing to build three additional 787s per month in Pugent Sound.
It is hard to overstate how dangerous a precedent this would create. Certainly unions see the benefit in requiring the NLRB to signoff on companies’ business plans, but it is hard to see how this decision is legal or serves the vast majority of Americans. In order to succeed in court, IAM must prove that Boeing’s decision created an adverse impact on Pugent Sound’s workers. However, none of the newly created South Carolina jobs came at the expense of Washington’s workers—in fact, the Pugent Sound factory has added 2,000 jobs since 2009.
The NLRB may have gone too far this time and risks congressional rebuke, just like its sister organization the National Mediation Board (NMB) received last month. Like the NLRB, the NMB oversees employer—union relations in the transportation sector. And also like the NLRB, President Obama stacked the NMB with former union leaders whom issued a pro-union rulemaking to increase unions’ falling membership numbers.
In a bold move, House Republicans included a provision in FAA reauthorization to overturn the NMB’s problematic ruling. Unsurprisingly, Democrats and union-owned Republicans offered amendments to strip this provision out of the FAA bill, but failed to do so. With FAA reauthorization now in conference, there remains a good chance that the NMB’s anti-worker ruling will be annulled.
With the NLRB’s recent attack on Boeing, the agency may suffer the same fate as the NMB—a public thumping dolled out by the GOP. Given the warranted outrage from South Carolina Representatives and Senators, expect forthcoming legislation to reprimand the NLRB. The NMB vote demonstrated that this Congress is not scared to clash with the most powerful interest group in America, Big Labor. Unions and the Administration are sure to retrench and protect the NLRB. An inspired and offended Republican caucus should prove to be a formidable force.
Christopher Prandoni serves as a Federal Affairs Manager of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR). He is also the Executive Director of the Alliance for Worker Freedom (AWF), an organization that combats anti-worker legislation and promotes free and open markets.
