Reply – Re: Labor Board Case Against Boeing Points to Fights to Come
Your Name
Subject
Message
or Cancel
In Reply To
Re: Labor Board Case Against Boeing Points to Fights to Come
— by Ted Ted
http://www.nlrb.gov/case/15-CA-019692

SIKORSKY AIR MAINTENANCE - ALJ CASE from Jan. 21st - re: similar action in Alabama, as it directly involves the IAM Union.

I believe their fight is better waged organizing the unorganized. As you shall see, Empoyers have their ready gambit of tactics which the regularly employ to stave off a legitimate Union Organizing campaign. These tactics always fail and the record amount of precedent case law developed over 75+ years will easily defeat the emplyers anti-union campaign.

The Boards actions I believe will end up at the Supreme Court at the bare minimum as it is now a ripe issue, for reasons already stated.

Oh by the way  - great posts on the drawings....where do you find that stuff?

The point of this ultimately is the the NLRB Board cannot dictate where an employer locates a physical plant, much to the chagrin of the impacted employees. Should they ever close down, effected employees would no doubt get the job offer at the new plant & probably be paid for relocation expenses & losses incurred on the real estate involved. Many though would not take the offer.

The US Supreme Court - when it gets there will not allow the Board to dictate where a company locates. So, the Union (IAM) has to be very proactive, get salts in place, get the folk organized, get the authorization cards signed and force a representation election. That is their best remedy for the South Carolina plant. Once complete, they will begin contract negotiations. As for Seattle, they have to make sure their Union Officials never give up the right to strike from their contract (CBA) in favor of a concession for Mandatory Arbitration as the UBC has done to us.

My entire point with this post relates to the Boards attempt to "legislate" which is out of their domain - that remains in the purview of Congress to initiate and pass legislation (an amendment to the NLRA).

The critical factor is in keeping the jobs in the United States. The NLRB Board, as others have ppointed out may drive this company to relocate offshore, via NAFTA etc & that is not acceptable. IAM will have to pull all stops out to preserve what they have in Seattle and keep those employees working. The IAM has a much stonger Union favoring employees as compared to the UBC. They will in th ened organize & sign the So Carolina employees to a union contract.

Back in 92 Ross Perot was derided as a nut, on the fringe etc by the mainstream media for his remarks regarding the passage of NAFTA, re: if NAFTA is signed there will be a giant sucking sound of jobs leaving the country". He was spot on then, yet the MSM & the so called experts & the politicans mad ehim out to be a loon. Perot knew what he was talking about. We need Obama gone ASAP, We need a President that has America as the first priority....NAFTA & CAFTA have to be repealed.