NLRB's Solomon Responds to Boeing Letter As Controversy Continues Over Legal Dispute

Tue. May 10, 2011

Addressing the controversy over his authorization of an unfair labor practice complaint against Boeing Co., National Labor Relations Board Acting General Counsel Lafe E. Solomon May 9 said there was “nothing remarkable or unprecedented” about his action, which he took only after a thorough investigation and careful review by NLRB employees.

Solomon's comments accompanied the release of a written response he sent to Boeing's General Counsel J. Michael Luttig, who May 3 criticized the complaint, which alleged Boeing unlawfully transferred some production of its 787 Dreamliner airplanes from Washington state to South Carolina. In a lengthy letter to Solomon, Luttig charged the complaint rested on misstatements about Boeing's conduct “that cannot be credibly maintained under law.”

In brief response to Luttig, Solomon said he disagrees with Luttig's contentions, but believes the ”appropriate forum” to test the position of the parties “is through the development of an evidentiary record on which an administrative law judge can make a decision which can be reviewed by the Board and ultimately the Courts.”

Solomon authorized an April 20 unfair labor practice complaint alleging Boeing illegally transferred some of the planned assembly of its Dreamliners to South Carolina because employees at Boeing's Puget Sound facilities supported lawful International Association of Machinists strikes against the company (77 DLR AA-1, 4/21/11).

But Luttig argued in his letter to the acting general counsel that South Carolina workers will be handling only “new work” needed to meet “historic demand” for the jetliner, which has not yet gone into production (86 DLR A-12, 5/4/11).

Asserting that “no work—none at all—was ‘removed' or ‘transferred' from Puget Sound,” Luttig insisted that the company's creation of jobs in South Carolina has not adversely affected any union-represented employee. He argued that the NLRB complaint mischaracterized statements by Boeing officials in support of its allegation that the company's building a second assembly line in South Carolina was improperly motivated by the lawful union activity of its Puget Sound employees.

The Boeing dispute has sparked political controversy, as nineteen Republican senators told President Obama in a May 4 letter they consider the NLRB complaint against Boeing to be a “government-led act of intimidation” against employers that build manufacturing plants in right-to-work states. They vowed to block confirmation of two of Obama's nominees to the agency if the White House does not withdraw the nominations (87 DLR A-10, 5/5/11).

A House committee is also moving to investigate the Boeing case. In a May 5 letter to Solomon, Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman John Kline (R-Minn.) and Phil Roe (R-Tenn.), chairman of the panel's Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee, expressed concern that the case “could have significant consequences for job-creators and workers. They made a formal request for documents explaining and supporting the acting general counsel's decision to issue the complaint.

Republicans Attacking All of Labor, IAM Says

Meanwhile, addressing the NLRB complaint May 9, Richard Michalski, general vice president of IAM, contended that the “right-wing” response is “raising the stakes and they're actually attacking all of labor.”

Addressing delegates to an IAM legislative conference being held in Washington, D.C., May 9-12, Michalski cited another letter sent by Republican Senators last week, this one from nine Republicans on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee to Solomon, condemning the NLRB as well as the acting general counsel (85 DLR A-1, 5/3/11).

In addition, he alleged that during the investigation leading up to the issuance of the complaint, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) threatened NLRB officers and investigators, telling them that if the complaint were issued there would be “severe and economic consequences.”

Michalski said “this is a defining moment,” adding it is “an attack on all of labor. Can you image, the National Mediation Board, if you're in transportation, or the NLRB, they would be timid if they get smacked down on this thing. You'll never get a charge issued on anything because a precedent has been set. A senator …can attack us blatantly and get away with it. Well, they're not going to get away with it,” he said.

When asked to comment on the allegations, Graham's communication director told BNA in a May 9 e-mail, “Senator Graham has made it clear that if the NLRB is successful it will do damage to the South Carolina economy. ”

As for the complaint itself, Michalski told the delegates to let their representatives know that Boeing engaged in a “clear violation” of the National Labor Relations Act. What the company did amounted to “retribution and revenge” for workers' exercising their right to strike, he said. “There is no halfpregnant statement here. Either they are right or they are wrong, and in this case they are wrong,” he added.

By Lawrence E. Dubé and Michelle Amber @ BNA

Less Rhetoric and More of the Law in the NLRB's Boeing Action

Tue. May 10, 2011

The complaint that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued against the Boeing Company on April 20th has touched off a storm of comment and controversy, much of it wrong. We need to get past rhetoric and look at what the case is really about.

In every state in our nation, the law provides important protections for individual workers when they act together to improve their work lives for themselves and their families. The law also says that employers cannot retaliate against workers who engage in protected activities. If retaliation were permitted, there would be no protection.

For many years, Boeing employees in the State of Washington have worked through their union, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, to improve their work lives at the company -- all while helping Boeing prosper by building the best commercial airliners in the world. Equally undisputed is that such activity was protected by law. So when Boeing itself announced that legally protected activities of its workers were the principal reason for moving a substantial portion of the company's 787 Dreamliner assembly to South Carolina, the company committed unlawful retaliation. The case is that simple.

Some commentators cry that the government is trying to tell a company where to put work. Boeing did not violate the law simply by moving 787 assembly. The violation was doing so in response to actions by its employees that the law protects. As the NLRB complaint states, "the relief requested by the Acting General Counsel does not seek to prohibit Respondent from making non-discriminatory decisions with respect to where work will be performed..."

Commentators also cry that this case is just a Democratic administration favoring labor. But the rights at stake in this case belong to workers in every state, regardless of their politics and even regardless of whether they are unionized. The NLRB is the law enforcement agency that is supposed to enforce the laws that Boeing broke. Do big companies not have to follow the rule of law?

Sadly, there are also commentators who are trying to recast the NLRB's complaint as pitting northern states against southern ones. Retaliation against workers for exercising protected rights is as unlawful in South Carolina as it is in Washington. The NLRB should enforce the law whenever and wherever retaliation against workers takes place.

We in the Machinists are proud to fight for our members at Boeing. We are just as proud to fight every day for our members who work in South Carolina and all across the South. We want Boeing and every other company that employs our members to prosper in the global economy, because that means jobs for our members and economic strength for America. But when any company violates legal protections for workers, the rule of law says there should be consequences.

Boeing's actions are properly before the NLRB, which should decide the case according to the law. The rhetoric should quiet down.

Read the OP-ED on Huffington Post.

Boeing Attacks NLRB Complaint

Tue. May 10, 2011

Employees at Boeing have always ensured the success of their employer. However, when Boeing made the decision to move production of the 787 Dreamliner to South Carolina they retaliated against their union represented employees in Washington State. This is a clear violation of federal labor law. Now, having to face the music, Boeing and its allies are attacking not only working families but also the law that protect them.

Facts and Misconceptions

This is a very simple case. It is undisputed that Boeing workers in State of Washington engaged in negotiations and other collective activity that the law protects. Boeing announced in the press that it was moving a substantial part of their assembly work on the company’s new 787 Dreamliner to South Carolina because of that activity. That constituted illegal retaliation, and that is what the NLRB complaint charged.
Boeing is not above the law. The NLRB is charged with enforcing the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). It investigated the facts and the law thoroughly before issuing the complaint, and a hearing is scheduled. Let’s see what due process produces instead of trying this case in the press or on the floor of Congress.
Many company statements show that retaliation. The link below, while long, is Boeing CEO Jim Albaugh in an interview with the Seattle Times (3/2/2010), in which he clearly states the company’s retaliatory motive:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2011237525_albaughvideo.html
Background Information

The National Labor Relations Act protects workers when they act together to improve their work lives for themselves and their families. It also prohibits employers from coercing, intimidating or retaliating against their workers who engage in protected rights. Often called the Wagner Act, it applies equally in all 50 states and has been the law of the land since 1935.

The next step is the NRLB to conduct a hearing before an administrative law judge, who will hear evidence in a hearing on the record. Boeing will have full opportunity to present its arguments on the facts and the law. Following the ALJ’s ruling, the losing party may appeal to the 5-member National Labor Relations Board and then to a U.S. Court of Appeals.

EducPrivatization Conferenceation Supporters Rally Against Walker at

by Mike Hall, May 9, 2011

More than 200 students, teachers and other activist—many from Wisconsin and Pennsylvania—rallied today in Washington, D.C., against Gov. Scott Walker’s (R) and Gov. Tom Corbett’s moves to privatize their states’ schools.

The two—along with former Washington, D.C., school chancellor Michelle Rhee—were the key speakers at an annual conference by a right-wing “education reform” foundation that advocates privatizing public education and draws of some of the biggest funders of right-wing political projects nationally.

The American Federation for Children (ACF) promotes school privatization and voucher schemes that take away critically needed funds for public education.

Both Walker and Corbett are pushing privatization efforts and Rhee has long been connected to corporate education interests who would profit from school privatization. According to The Nation’s John Nichols:

In addition to his much-publicized proposal to strips teachers of collective bargaining rights and to make it dramatically harder for their unions to advocate for small class sizes and other priorities, Walker’s budget plan seeks to cut funding for local schools and reduce the authority of local school boards to make decisions that defend and strengthen public education in their communities. It also outlines a number of initiatives designed to clear the way for and encourage private-school choice schemes

Corbett has also proposed a budget that drastically slashes public school funding and wants to spend state funds on private schools. Tim Brown, a Pennsylvania parent who bused down from Pennsylvania, told Philly.Com that Corbett’s and other voucher plans are “cynical maneuvering by right-wing billionaires,” who want to privatize all education in America.

ACF was founded Michigan billionaires Dick and Betsy DeVos. Dick DeVos is a former Republican nominee for governor of Michigan and Betsy DeVos is a former chair of the Michigan Republican Party. Writes Nichols

But the couple’s real political work has involved the direction of tens of millions of dollars into the ideological and electoral infrastructure that supports school privatization.

At the rally, protesters carried hand-lettered signs that included “Public Schools Make America Strong,” “Move America Forward,” “Save Public Education” and “Public Education, Not Privatization.” But several members of the tea party-aligned organization “Freedom Works”—founded by former House majority leader Dick Armey—posed as demonstrators and one posed as a reporter before being outed. Armed with small video cameras they then tried to goad ralliers into confrontations.

Currency Manipulation Should Top U.S.-China Talks

by James Parks, May 9, 2011
China’s currency manipulation should be the main focus of talks this week between high level U.S. and Chinese government officials, says Scott Paul, executive director of the Alliance for American Manufacturing (AAM).

The meetings in Washington, D.C. May 9 –10 provide an important opportunity for the American delegation—led by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner—to back up the Obama administration’s tough talk on the Chinese government’s undervalued currency with strong action, he says.

If the administration will not get tough and demand that China play by the rules, Congress will have no option but to once again pass tough legislation to counter the artificial advantage China enjoys on trade.

More than 5 million manufacturing jobs have been lost since China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001, Paul says. Even at the current rate of manufacturing job creation, it would take 24 years to restore all of the lost manufacturing jobs our economy has shed, he adds.

Paul says:

We hear tough talk, but we need equally tough action to level the playing field for American companies and their workers if this economy is to grow and prosper in the coming months and years.

Meanwhile, the unfair trade practices that force production to move overseas are weakening our national defense industrial capabilities, Paul says. We now have to rely on critical components for weapons systems from uncertain trading partners, such as China, who has been restricting exports of rare-earth minerals and elements used in many defense applications. Paul says the U.S. public correctly believes our nation’s economic strength and national security depends on a strong manufacturing sector.

Asian Pacific American Community Active in State Battle Fights

Jenny Ho, a labor economist with AFSCME and secretary-treasurer for the D.C. Chapter of the Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance (APALA), sends us this report from her experience in Ohio mobilizing residents

The forces against workers’ rights are powerful. Super-rich global conglomerates and a web of very well-funded conservative think tanks are currently fueling GOP-led attacks against working families across the nation, shamelessly lobbying for union-busting and corporate tax cuts in a campaign that even Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin has admitted has little to do with budget deficits. Yet America’s workers have shown time and again that workers, united, have prevailed in the most daunting battles. More than ever, the union movement must build solidarity. We must pull together all the stakeholders of the American Dream.

In Ohio, I joined workers and allies in the campaign against Senate Bill (S.B.) 5—which, if left to stand, would strip collective bargaining rights from thousands of public servants. We reached out to small local businesses who understood that slashing wages and benefits creates a downward spiral detrimental to the local economy. Currently, more than 400 small businesses, which serve a diverse number of neighborhoods and communities across Ohio, are on board, including family-owned restaurants, auto repair shops, independent bookstores and many more.

Taking part in such critical coalition-building activities reinforced my conviction in the power of community partnerships. As an APALA member and chapter leader, I recognize the crucial role that labor constituency groups must play in the current battle to save the middle class. Anti-union legislation such as S.B. 5 will have serious repercussions for the Asian Pacific American (APA) community. There are some 800,000 APA workers represented by public-sector unions and recent research revealed that APA workers and their families depend on the wage and benefit protections that unionization brings. The majority of APA workers are immigrant workers who look to unions as the first line of defense against unfair employment practices. Plus, the APA community faces the deterioration of vital public services. As a result of an initiative spearheaded by APALA, the National Council of Asian Pacific Americans (NCAPA), a coalition of 29 organizations representing a wide range of Asian Pacific American communities, pledged support for public employees in a historic and unified gesture of solidarity in March.

With 13 chapters in eight states, APALA has been a driving progressive force within the APA community since it was founded in 1992. APALA has highlighted the stories of APA workers and APA labor leaders, educated the APA members on their rights in the workplace and solidified the support of community allies. As the fight for workers’ rights intensifies across the country, APALA members are fired up! We have taken part in solidarity events in New York; New Jersey; Washington, D.C.; Detroit; Alameda, Calif., Los Angeles; San Francisco; and Sacramento, Calif. APALA members have traveled to Wisconsin to stand with workers. APALA chapters continue to hold local workers’ rights hearings, bringing together community partners to uplift the voice of workers.

The current political landscape has heightened the urgency for growth and capacity building. Facing escalating attacks against workers’ rights, APALA must expand activities to bridge community groups and labor. We must ensure that the rapidly growing immigrant workforce recognizes its shared interests with the union movement and is actively engaged with us. Growing APALA membership and building new chapters in all 50 states, which APA workers call home, is the only way we can effectively equip APA workers and their families with the knowledge and training to protect their basic human right to organize under the most challenging conditions. Together we can build a stronger movement for every community, every family and every worker.

IAM: America Needs Manufacturing Policy Now

by James Parks, May 9, 2011

Unlike our competitors, the United States does not have a national manufacturing strategy. The “Make It in America” agenda, proposed by House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), is a step toward pursuing policies that will support and create manufacturing jobs, says Machinists (IAM) President Tom Buffenbarger. He urged support for the agenda and praised parts of it as critical to restoring the nation’s economic and national security.

Each month that passes without a comprehensive national plan to rebuild our manufacturing infrastructure is another month this nation suffers needlessly. The time for debate and lip service to the notion of large-scale job creation has past. We need big ideas, big enough to put hundreds of thousands of Americans back to work every month. Our economy will remain stuck in neutral until we do.

Every American should be concerned about the outsourcing of key defense capabilities and loss of this nation’s ability to manufacture the means of our own defense.

The IAM released “Creating And Sustaining U.S. Manufacturing Jobs,” which calls for specific policy changes to bolster manufacturing, including requiring domestic employment impact statements for government program contracts and enforcing trade laws among others.

Read the full report here.

Washington Hospital Center Nurses Ratify Contract

by James Parks, May 9, 2011

After nearly a year without a contract and a temporary lockout two months ago, the 1,650 registered nurses at Washington Hospital Center ratified a contract in voting over the weekend.

The agreement includes a new staffing plan that will increase the number of nurses at the bedside and a new Professional Practice Committee to address and solve issues dealing with patient care and staffing issues. The agreement also requires hospital managers to meet with the nurse committee on a regular basis and respond to proposals to improve patient care.

Most nurses’ wages will increase by 8.5 percent to 9 percent over three and a half years under the new pact. The deal also restores the differential pay for nurses who work evenings, nights and weekends to pre-March 2011 levels for 30 months of the 42-month agreement.

Emma Bioc, a union bargaining committee member, said:

This was a long and difficult struggle. I am proud that the nurses stood in solidarity with each other and for our patients. This contract respects our professional practice, our expertise and dedication.

The agreement also includes a return to work for eight nurses fired during the back-to-back snow storms in February 2010.

Linda Buckman, a 31-year nurse who was fired after the storm, said:

It is only because we have a strong union that my co-workers and I are able to return to work with dignity and care for our patients.

The nurses at the largest hospital in the nation’s capital—owned by the MedStar Health chain—have been without a contract since June. In October, they voted by a 15-1 margin to join the National Nurses United (NNU). In March hospital management temporarily locked out the nurses.

Video Finalists Picked in LabourStart’s Video of the Year Contest

by Mike Hall, May 8, 2011

The five finalists have been selected for LabourStart’s second annual Labor Video of the Year competition and you have until midnight GMT (8 p.m. EDT) May 31 to select your favorite.

The five videos were produced by:
•The United Steelworkers (USW), highlighting Honeywell’s use of inexperienced, temporary workers at a uranium facility following a lockout;
•The Electrical Workers (IBEW), portraying corporate-style “workplace democracy”;
•The Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC), showing how a union contract means job safety;
•The Transport Workers (TWU), reviewing the fight for workers’ rights in Wisconsin; and
•Melissa Koch, who tracks her father’s outsourced airline mechanic job to China.

Click here to view the entries and vote.

The producer of the overall winning video will receive a subscription to IMDb Pro, worth $100. Winners in the various categories also will be recognized. The overall winning video and runner up will be featured Nov. 18–20 in a special screening at the LabourStart global solidarity conference in Istanbul.

Last year’s winner was “What Have Unions Ever Done for Us?” a Monty Python-like look at a scowling CEO and his minions as they prepare to bring a union to its knees (click here). The video was produced by Your Rights At Work, the Australian counterpart of the AFL-CIO community affiliate, Working America.

Join OSHA’s Safe Workplaces Photo Contest

by James Parks, May 7, 2011

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is sponsoring a nationwide photography contest: “Picture It! Safe Workplaces for Everyone.”

The contest, which is part of OSHA’s yearlong 40th anniversary celebration, will help kick off a national effort to raise awareness about workplace safety and health.

The contest is open to anyone age 18 and older and will run through Aug. 12. Both professional and amateur photographers are welcome to enter. Participants can find contest rules and submit photographs at www.osha.gov/osha40/photo-contest.html.

Photographs must be taken in the United States or its territories. An expert panel of professionals in the fields of photography and public affairs will determine the contest winners. The panel includes photojournalist Earl Dotter; Carl Fillichio, senior adviser to Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis for communications and public affairs; Kathleen Klech, photo director for Condé Nast Traveler magazine; Shawn Moore, chief photographer at the U.S. Department of Labor; and George Tolbert, retired photographer for the U.S. Senate.

First-, second- and third-place prizes will be awarded for the most outstanding portrayals of occupational safety and health in areas of artistic value and the ability to raise awareness about safety and health to the general public.

All winning and finalist photographs will be displayed on the OSHA photo contest webpage. The first-place winner also will receive a framed letter of congratulations from Solis, and the three winning photos will be framed and hung in OSHA’s national office in Washington, D.C.

Along with the general public, OSHA contractors and special government employees may participate in the contest. However, federal OSHA, “state plan” state OSHA employees and on-site consultation employees are not eligible.

If you have questions, call OSHA’s Office of Communications at 202-693-1999 or photocontest@osha.gov.