Author Topic: NLRB Expected to Clarify ‘Micro Union’ Decision  (Read 276 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline flowers

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 18,338
NLRB Expected to Clarify ‘Micro Union’ Decision
« on: December 19, 2013, 09:07:59 AM »

National Labor Relations Board general counsel Richard Griffin is expected to issue a new legal interpretation of micro unions, which could have major implications for unionization moving forward.

Griffin, a longtime union lawyer, announced at the Cornell School of Industrial and Labor Relations that the board will issue a guidance to clarify the controversial 2010 Specialty Healthcare decision. The Democratic board departed from years of precedent when it ruled in 2010 that workers could unionize by departments without a full majority of a shop’s employees signing on.

Former NLRB board member Peter Schaumber said that the decision could cause havoc for employers who could be forced to negotiate with multiple unions working toward multiple ends. While a traditional organizing effort would focus on all restaurant employees, for example, micro unions allow unions to form for bartenders, while a second union could organize busboys.

“This misguided standard threatens to balkanize the workplace, dramatically increasing an employer’s labor relations costs as it will have to negotiate and enforce multiple collective bargaining agreements,” Schaumber said. “It demonstrates that the animating goal for the Obama Board is not stability in the workplace, which benefits the worker, the employer, and the economy, it is to increase union membership.”

The NLRB allowed a small group of nurses at the Specialty Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center in Mobile, Ala. to organize a union without the consent of all nurses at the facility. Micro unions have since been formed in four more companies. Women’s shoe retailers at Bergdorf Goodman, for example, were able to form a union without approval from employees who perform similar duties in other departments.

Republicans have set their sights on reversing the NLRB’s micro union decision through legislation. Sen. Johnny Isakson (R., Ga.) sponsored legislation in the Senate to ban these organizing tactics.

“Micro unions significantly tip the scales in favor of unions and neglect our nation’s long-standing precedents of collective bargaining. This unfair labor practice makes it easier for unions to gain access to employees, and makes it nearly impossible for employers to manage such fragmentation of their workforce,” he said. “I have sponsored the Representation Fairness Restoration Act to reinstate the traditional standard for determining appropriate bargaining units, and I will continue to fight against micro unions.”

Brian Newell, spokesman for the House Education and Workforce Committee, said that Griffin and the NLRB should work to protect workers and employers from partial unionization.

Online Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 41,184
  • SMOD 2016
Re: NLRB Expected to Clarify ‘Micro Union’ Decision
« Reply #1 on: December 19, 2013, 10:15:13 PM »
fascism by any means possible.  Do not forget that the two movements that spawned the fascist political worldview were both based on labor union support:  Mussolini's Italian fascists and the German NSDAP - aka, the Nazis.  The full acronym of the NSDAP, when spelled out, makes this clear:  Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, which translates into English as:  National Socialist German Workers' Party
I won't vote for Clinton, but I cannot vote for Trump.  How could I explain to my daughter why I supported a man who sees her as nothing more than a piece of meat, a piece of a$$ for him to grope for his own private pleasure.

"Trump supporter" - the very definition of an SFI

Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo