Boeing vs. the NLRB: A Naked Power Grab by Radical Pro-Unionists
In this article, in several different ways to the same end, von Spakovsky and Sherk confound the decency—or it may be, the unwisdom—which the 1st Am protects, with the natural consequences which can—and, in this set of circumstances and conditions, do—follow use of the right of expression:
Say the guy announces: “Yeah, I shot the bitch.’. While he has the right to so speak, the thing which he has spoken carries import which is quite different from any questions as to whether the 1st Am allows freedom of expression for him to so announce, or no.
Than any casual relationship between unrelated persons, the agreement between the union and the corp. is more like a marriage: If the guy does not tell us that, he’s moving his office because he’s tired of looking out the window and seeing his wife’s car, and in that regard, to his eye, the new location has better scenery, how would we know of his mean-spiritedness—his move may have been a “business decision”?
Our learned authors here, blink the fact that, in these types of relationships—and, where either party is free to first seek a divorce, which would then allow all things and including seeking another consort—there exists the supervening tacit or explicit intention and agreement to “work things out” firstly, through attempts at negotiation, . . . good faith attempts.
I offer for your consideration that, the principal puzzle piece here, is, how such smart designers and engineers and skilled line workers can continue cranking out such a high level of work product, when saddled by an obviously over-paid executive staff who are unutterably open-mouthed in their self-announcements of stupidity, . . .
“With Boeing CEO Jim McNerney’s having stated in an interview that, recurring strikes by the union factored into Boeing’s decision, Boeing involved itself in anti-union activity. The First Amendment protects Boeing executives’ freedom to have said this. In five strikes over the past 35 years, Boeing was confronted with repeated lapses in productivity and which hampered its ability to deliver promised products on time.”.
One might reasonably hope that—as in the multitude of words, there wanteth not sin—in some college class studying work environments, of a decent upbring, or just somewhere along the line, the exec. might have picked up some internal advisement which would have told him of the advisability of sometimes keeping one’s mouth closed, . . .
Oh well, just another blow to America, . . .
