NLRB Lends Big Labor Another Huge Helping Hand

Obama’s National Labor Relations Board has put out another new rule that just happens to have potential benefits for Big Labor.

The National Labor Relations Board has approved a new rule that requires private employers to display posters that tell workers about their right to form a union.

The rule requires businesses to prominently display the new posters that explain the right to bargain collectively, distribute union literature and engage in other union activities without reprisal.

Union advocates say the rule gives workers information they should know about their legal rights. But business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, say the posters will make it appear the government is encouraging workers to join unions and will create a more favorable climate for union organizing.

This follows the NLRB’s unprecedented case against Boeing in South Carolina, which threatens to undo state level right-to-work laws, and its snap election rule. Take the three actions together and the NLRB is very obviously tilting the playing field in favor of unions at the expense of freedom of association and American jobs.

Check out how things in Your Company might go. NLRB forces Your Company to post materials about union membership. Big Labor does a little scouting to find sympathizers without Your Company’s management ever knowing about it. Then, per the snap election rule, Big Labor gets its sympathizers organized and ready for the vote without Your Company being aware of it, and calls an election to which Your Company only has about 10 days to provide any sort of counter. The mandated posters make it look like the government is encouraging union membership, and Big Labor’s stealth campaign has reinforced that, only sparking the actual election when the votes seem to be in hand. Your Company is now very suddenly a union shop, with all the strikes, delays, threats and headaches that go along with that. And if management squawks about any of this, guess who gets keelhauled by the NLRB?

With this story in mind, what to make of AFL-CIO chief Richard Trumka’s threat to use union money to create what may amount to a third party? Ed covers that over at Hot Air.

Going forward, Trumka said, the labor movement will build up its own political structures and organizations rather than contribute to and depend on the Democratic Party’s political operation. …

Labor has traditionally been a major contributor to Democratic candidates and causes around the country. Trumka said that their outside effort will help keep union-backed candidates more accountable for promises made on the campaign trail.

With the NLRB taking such sweeping actions while the Democrats in Wisconsin and Indiana fled their states to defend Big Labor’s government union workers, what more could Trumka want?

I don’t think he’s splitting off from the Democrats. It looks to me like he’s finalizing the full labor takeover of the Democratic Party. Big Labor already owns Obama but doesn’t necessarily own Democrats who aren’t as far to the left, and in particular Democrats from right-to-work states. If Big Labor can primary them and replace them with its puppets, then Richard Trumka is king of the Democrats.