Skip to main content

View Diary: Lindsey Graham attempting to slip anti-worker language into omnibus bill (34 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Boeing broke the law (6+ / 0-)

    by punishing workers for exercising their rights under the National Labor Relations Act.  I suppose the standard with Corporate America, however, is, "Oh, would you like to break the law?  Here, let me fix that law for you, then."

    "Run, comrade, the old world is behind you!" -- Situationist graffito, 1968

    by Pesto on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 01:18:32 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  This may very well go to SCOTUS (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pengiep

      And, we ALL know how that will turn out.

      Boeing is a mega-corp...history of nebulous donations...SCOTUS being majority conservative....they win.

      It's what we're looking at if we lose our hold on the political end of America.  

      - If you don't like gay marriage, blame straight people. They're the ones who keep having gay babies.

      by r2did2 on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 01:27:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Exactly Right (0+ / 0-)

      ...Pesto. Boeing most certainly broke the law. They did so by directly and repeatedly stating that they were transferring a production line to their non-union plant in South Carolina because of the history of strikes at its IAM-unionized factory. This is against the law, specifically violating sections 7 and 8 of the National Labor Relations Act.

      What has been lost in this is the flagrancy with which Boeing violated the law, which is exceedingly lenient toward "employers' free speech" which not only allows employers to harangue workers with anti-union propaganda but also provides a range of speech in which vague allusions to the possible consequences of union activity--to say nothing of employers' saying nothing and simply relocating work--are allowable under the law. Boeing couldn't even restrain their anti-union animus under that elastic, highly generous rubric. Legal cases, that is, hold that employers must explicitly connect decisions affecting employment, pay, benefits, etc., to union activity to have violated the law, and a very wide range of actions and statements, according to the NLRB, fall short of that despite the clear implications that somewhat vaguer threats pose. I strongly disagree with it, but that's the case history of the Board. Boeing openly, flagrantly, and quite frankly stupidly violated this gaping generosity the NLRB provides employers.

      Lastly for now, the Republican trope that the NLRB ruling on Boeing "kills jobs" is pathetically inane. It does no such thing, actually preserving them and, in a unionized factory, on better terms for workers that will consequently contribute more to the economy than lower-paying non-union ones would in South Carolina. What Republicans seek is legal cover to accelerate outsourcing away from unionized jobs to non-union, so-called "right-to-work" states while speciously conflating anti-unionism with job growth in their rhetoric.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site