Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Employers must act now to prepare their workplace for increased union activity!"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 04:05 PM
Original message
"Employers must act now to prepare their workplace for increased union activity!"
I love the smell of well-deserved panic in the morning. We're at the gate, and they know it. :D

If you're wondering how big a deal the new NLRB posting rule is for the anti-union employers and other right-wing assholes, take a gander. http://www.ngelaw.com/attorney/bio.aspx?ID=747">This attorney advises employers on how best to maintain a workplace with a "union-free philosophy." What an asshole. But http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=6219c46a-a5f0-468f-8670-8085ce8a58e5">check it out:

Since its inception, the Obama administration has launched union- and employee-friendly initiatives, including several failed attempts to pass the infamous Employee Free Choice Act in an effort to slant the playing field toward unions and employees. Such efforts have often threatened devastating consequences for employers.

Perhaps sensing the powerful resistance to the re-invigorated labor movement posed by employers, the National Labor Relations Board (“NRLB") has joined the fight, promulgating a new rule that requires private employers to inform their employees of their right to form and support a union. Employers must comply with the new rule by Nov. 14, 2011. Failure to post the notice is itself a new unfair labor practice and can also make it more difficult for an employer to defend against other unfair labor practice charges.

(snip)

Because the new Notice will likely result in increased union organizing activity, employers should take this opportunity to ensure their non-solicitation, non-distribution and other union-related policies are up-to-date and NLRA compliant. Employers should also ensure that their general employment policies, including their non-discrimination, anti-harassment, Internet and social media use, and other employment policies are current and lawful. Further, employers should invest time in re-training Human Resources and management-level employees to make sure they are familiar with the NLRA, other key employment laws and the employer’s various employment policies. This re-training is invaluable in helping Human Resources and management-level employees tackle difficult questions from what will almost certainly be a more challenging workforce. Regardless of whether an employer has already developed and/or communicated its stance on union representation to its employees, this is a good time to revisit its position and solidify its strategy for dealing with organizing drives, concerted employee activity and other issues that might crop up more frequently as a result of the new rule. Employers should communicate with employees now and often to reinforce employees’ right to oppose unionization. Employers should also continue to identify, reduce and eliminate the root causes of employee dissatisfaction that increase the likelihood of a successful union organizing drive.

The NLRB’s new rule makes one thing clear: Employees will now be more informed than ever about their rights under the NLRA. Employers must act now to not only comply with the new rule, but to also prepare their workplace for increased union activity and to offset the potential impact of the new Notice.


Oh, that wacky anti-labor Obama Administration, eh? :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FSogol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. K & R. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProdigalJunkMail Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. global enforcement of this policy is ridiculous
as it even applies to mom and pop shops that have extremely low employee counts (like 1 or 2)...

i agree it has it's place, but in EVERY workplace? i don't think so.

sP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. What's the problem?
No bigger than OSHA signs. You can download and print them free.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProdigalJunkMail Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. it makes no sense to enforce display of signs like these
when the place of employment is not your typical office. if i don't have clients in my office i am not required to post OSHA placards. however, even though it is just me, according to the NLRB I will have to display this even though i am the only employee.

sP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. As the only employee, it would not be in your best interest to report your employer
...for non-compliance with this and other related labor laws. You do understand NLRB enforcement in your situation would be reactive only to complaints, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProdigalJunkMail Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. well, sure...but I have those days...
i love my job, i love my job, i love my boss, i love my boss

sP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
5. Even the limpest enforcement of labor law sends these robber barons into a tizzy
The Obama administration can hardly hold a candle to real live advocates for worker rights, but even their feeble efforts discombobulate the oligarchy, which has had an open field to run roughshod over workers for 30 years. I find it humorous, though, that oppressive employers are quick to holler about "outside agitators" stirring up their workers, but the industrial machinery that's in place to oppress workers, including this attorney and his anti-labor organizations never seem to quite earn the sobriquet of being "outsiders" even in the popular media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Corporate lawyers and corporate media see eye-to-eye.
Shocking innit? ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
9. Whatever happened to the EFCA the Obama admin promised?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Which parts of the EFCA are you looking for?
Most have amusingly been implemented through regulatory means by this NLRB.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. So employers can be penalized for firing agitators? 90 days for collective agreement?
Dropped the second ballot?

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Oh, good! You looked it up.
Most importantly, we got our card check rule -- Issue #1. Check the National Retail Federation's response to the latest rules, they're apoplectic.

NLRB has eliminated "secret ballot" challenges, and the requirement that the entire company unionize (instead of picking away division to division, which is historically how organizing works best). Also, new company owners can't challenge unions' existence at the federal level immediately after becoming owners -- they now have to wait some longish period. Used to be every ownership paper-shuffle would afford another opportunity to disband a union.

These were all adopted on a 3-1 vote from the from the board: that would be three Democrats, TWO of whom (Becker and Pearce, former attorneys for AFL-CIO IIRC) were recess appointments last year.

So if you follow labor issues, and I do, you're sharpening the big spears. :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
11. Oh god forbid those workers get their rights!!!
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-02-11 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
14. Gratuitous kick. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC