Labor

Anti-Union FAA Bill Passes Congress

Dave Johnson — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:16:44 -0500

The FAA reauthorization bill has passed Congress with its anti-union provisions. Once again big companies of the 1% were able to use their money and power to buy legislation that hurts 99% of us. And many Dems joined in. Watch the powerful video at the end of this post.

TPM has the headline that just about covers it: Senate Dems Greenlight Key Anti-Union Bill,

With the help of Senate Democrats, Congress took its final step Monday toward enactment of long-term FAA reauthorization legislation, despite an aggressive last-minute effort by organized labor to kill the package.

... Democrats and Republicans have been tussling over this bill for a year now, with the key flashpoint being language aimed at preventing transportation workers from forming unions. In the end, Democratic leaders agreed with Republicans on a new measure that largely accomplishes the same anti-union goals — and labor officials are steamed.

Huffington Post: Senate Passes FAA Bill With Anti-Union Measure,

The Senate passed a Federal Aviation Administration bill on Monday that includes an anti-union measure bitterly opposed by labor groups.

... Among the controversial provisions were changes to labor law for rail and airline workers -- backed by the airline industry -- that would count anyone who did not vote in an election for a union as voting against it, making it much more difficult to certify attempts to organize new unions.

That measure was stripped in a conference committee to work out differences between the Senate and House versions of the bill, only to be replaced by another that raises the threshold for seeking a union from requiring 35 percent of workers' signatures to requiring half.

Sneak Attack Against American Workers

The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA (AFA) issued a statement: Senate Passage of FAA Reauthorization Attacks Collective Bargaining Rights,

"AFA has long been a proponent of passing a comprehensive funding bill that allows the FAA to move forward on vital safety and airport improvement projects that help to enhance the world's greatest aviation system. Corporate interests and right-wing ideologues took this vital piece of legislation and used it to destroy collective bargaining affecting workers across the country.

"The 157 House Democrats and 15 Democratic Senators who stood up for collective bargaining should be lauded as heroes. Still, the sneak attack against American workers slipped through this Congress. Elections have consequences and this vote will too. We will not forget and we will continue to build a movement of the 99% to stand up and fight back."

Another bad day for labor, assisted by Senate Dems.

CWA President Larry Cohen, saying the FAA Bill is an Attack on Workers:

Crucial Senate Labor Vote Today - Actions You Can Take

Dave Johnson — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 09:57:12 -0500

The Senate scheduled a vote for 5:30 p.m. today on restricting labor rights in the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill. Committee Dems caved and gave away union election rights. At least 18 unions, including the Communications Workers of America and the Service Employees International Union, have voiced opposition. Here are some actions you can take right now.

Last week, in FAA Bill Still Anti-Labor! Call Your Senators!:

Why This Fight?

The reason there is a fight over labor rules in an FAA bill at all is that Delta Airlines is trying to keep unions out, so the 1% can keep from paying good wages and benefits to the 99%. And, as usually happens, they are offering the Republican Party a share of the take if they can just make it happen for them.

Such is our present-day political system. It seems to come down to who is giving the most money to the Republican Party gets priority in legislation. ("Drill, baby, drill!")

Compromise?

If you start with a bill that says, "kill all the unions, kill all the unions, kill all the unions, kill all the unions" and take out one "kill all the unions," is that a compromise? The unions are still killed three times over.

The FAA bill contains a number of provisions that make it nearly impossible to establish a union, including but not limited to:

the percentage of workers that say they want a vote on unionization increases from 35 to 50 percent
tricky election run-off rules open up elections to even more company interference
a procedure allowing for the wholesale decertification of a whole host of unions through mergers

CALL YOUR SENATORS NOW! Click here for help.

CWA's action: Will Senate Democrats Stand Up to the GOP?

CREDO has an action out, please click this.

Tell Senate Democrats: Stand with unions. Don't cave to Republicans.

For months, House Republicans have been trying to use the reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as a way to attack labor unions.

And until recently, Senate Democrats along with their colleagues from the House and the White House have been standing strong and fighting back.

But now, Senate Democratic leadership is poised to cave to the rightwing and anti-worker Republicans in the House, and allow what should be a bill about aviation safety and security to become one that unilaterally changes labor law to the detriment of working people.

Tell Senate Democrats: Stand with unions. Don't cave to Republicans.

Tweet This:
Call your Senators today and let them know that FAA Bill is a "No Compromise" http://bit.ly/yWAkMA @CWAUnion #1u #p2

End Secret Corporate Campaign Cash

While you are at it, join us going after the source of the problem. Click here to End Secret Campaign Cash:

End Secret Corporate Campaign Cash

It has been two years since the Supreme Court decided in the infamous Citizens United case that corporations can spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns. Since then, our democracy has been drowning in a tsunami of corporate special interest money. Our government is under the thumb of the Koch brothers instead of the hands of the people.

We cannot ultimately right this wrong until we can organize the states to pass a constitutional amendment that declares what everyone except Mitt Romney seems to understand: corporations are not people and money is not speech.

But until then, we can take action right now to force corporations to make their campaign spending public. Sign the petition below and tell the SEC: No more secret political money. Make all publicly traded corporations disclose their campaign spending to the public.

FAA Bill Still Anti-Labor! Call Your Senators!

Dave Johnson — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 10:56:07 -0500

Not long ago, in A Win For Labor - FAA Bill Drops Anti-Union Language, I wrote that, "negotiators have dropped the anti-union language for votes to start a union. Republicans were insisting that no-shows be counted as "No" votes. Delta's check must have been mailed late."

Well, not so fast. While dropping a blatant anti-labor requirement that any non-voters be counted as 'no' voters, it turns out that the bill remains solidly and sneakily anti-labor. This is supposed to be a bill about airline safety and security, but the fight is over anti-labor provisions... what's up with that? Laura Clawson at Daily Kos writes in, Unions call on Democrats to reject poison pills buried in Republican 'compromise' on FAA,

When Republicans suggested that they would agree to a compromise on Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization, dropping their demand to count workers who did not vote in union representation elections as having voted against the union in exchange for raising the threshold of workers asking to get a union representation election from 35 percent to 50 percent, there were two possibilities: Either Republicans were dropping a huge demand in exchange for something relatively minor and it was a bit of a win, or there was something sneaky buried in what Republicans now wanted.

Why This Fight?

The reason there is a fight over labor rules in an FAA bill at all is that Delta Airlines is trying to keep unions out, so the 1% can keep from paying good wages and benefits to the 99%. And, as usually happens, they are offering the Republican Party a share of the take if they can just make it happen for them. Such is our present-day political system. It seems to come down to who is giving the most money to the Republican Party gets priority in legislation. ("Drill, baby, drill!")

Compromise?

If you start with a bill that says, "kill all the unions, kill all the unions, kill all the unions, kill all the unions" and take out one "kill all the unions" is that a compromise? The unions are still killed three times over.

The FAA bill contains a number of provisions that make it nearly impossible to establish a union, including but not limited to:

the percentage of workers that say they want a vote on unionization increases from 35 to 50 percent
tricky election run-off rules open up elections to even more company interference
a procedure allowing for the wholesale decertification of a whole host of unions through mergers

So Will Dems Cave?

So the question is, will Democrats cave on this? Some are saying that they have "made compromises" but what has happened is they took out one part that makes it almost impossible to form a union while leaving in other parts that make it nearly impossible to form a union. The only "compromise" appears to be from almost impossible to nearly impossible and labor is screwed either way. Or, from above, the unions are killed three times over instead of four times over.

As David Dayen reports at Firedoglake, a number of labor organizations have signed a letter rejecting this "compromise." The unions signing the letter are the United Auto Workers union; Teamsters; Communications Workers of America; Association of Flight Attendants-CWA; International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees-IBT; American Federation of Government Employees; International Association of Machinists; National Education Association; Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen-IBT; Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen; Service Employees Local 32BJ-National Conference of Fireman and Oilers; Sheet Metal Workers; United Steelworkers; American Train Dispatchers Association; Transportation Communications Union-IAM; Amalgamated Transit Union; United Transportation Union; and UniteHere.

Fight Back Against Attacks By The 1%

Stand with these unions to help protect the middle class from attacks by the 1%. CALL YOUR SENATORS TODAY and tell them you want the FAA bill to be about airline safety and security, not busting unions.

Then, click here to sign a letter, Stop This Radical Threat to Workers' Rights:

Radical anti-union members of Congress are attempting to rewrite the Railway Labor Act and change the role of the National Mediation Board without debate or discussion. They have included drastic changes to the law in the FAA Reauthorization bill.

The changes these radicals are seeking would:

Make it much harder for airline and railroad workers to hold union representation elections.
Threaten airline and railroad workers’ right to a secret ballot during union representation campaigns, allowing for management intimidation and retaliation.
Allow airline and railroad management to decertify unions without an election in a merger.

Democracy v. Plutocracy, Unions vs. Servitude

Dave Johnson — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:25:38 -0500

Servitude: "a condition in which one lacks liberty especially to determine one's course of action or way of life"

Democracy: "a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections"

Plutocracy: government by the wealthy

Labor union: an organization of workers formed for the purpose of advancing its members' interests in respect to wages, benefits, and working conditions

You may have seen the recent flurry of stories about how high-tech products are made in China. The stories focus on Apple, but it isn't just Apple. These stories of exploited Chinese workers are also the story of how and why we -- 99% of us, anyway -- are all feeling such a squeeze here, because we are suffering the disappearance of our middle class. Our choice is democracy or servitude.

Working In China

A collection of excerpts from the Charles Duhigg and David Barboza story, Human Costs Are Built Into an iPad and the Charles Duhigg and Keith Bradsher story, How the U.S. Lost Out on iPhone Work both from the NY Times:

Rousted from dorms at midnight, told to work:

Apple had redesigned the iPhone’s screen at the last minute, forcing an assembly line overhaul. New screens began arriving at the plant near midnight.

A foreman immediately roused 8,000 workers inside the company’s dormitories, according to the executive. Each employee was given a biscuit and a cup of tea, guided to a workstation and within half an hour started a 12-hour shift fitting glass screens into beveled frames. Within 96 hours, the plant was producing over 10,000 iPhones a day.

“Work hard on the job today or work hard to find a job tomorrow.”

Banners on the walls warned the 120,000 employees: “Work hard on the job today or work hard to find a job tomorrow.”

(How close is that to the very definition of servitude?)

Long shifts, legs swollen from standing:

Shifts ran 24 hours a day, and the factory was always bright. At any moment, there were thousands of workers standing on assembly lines or sitting in backless chairs, crouching next to large machinery, or jogging between loading bays. Some workers’ legs swelled so much they waddled. “It’s hard to stand all day,” said Zhao Sheng, a plant worker.

Write confessions if late:

Mr. Lai was soon spending 12 hours a day, six days a week inside the factory, according to his paychecks. Employees who arrived late were sometimes required to write confession letters and copy quotations. There were “continuous shifts,” when workers were told to work two stretches in a row, according to interviews.

Injuries from speed-up toxics:

Investigations by news organizations revealed that over a hundred employees had been injured by n-hexane, a toxic chemical that can cause nerve damage and paralysis.

Employees said they had been ordered to use n-hexane to clean iPhone screens because it evaporated almost three times as fast as rubbing alcohol. Faster evaporation meant workers could clean more screens each minute.

American companies forcing Asian suppliers to squeeze workers:

“You can set all the rules you want, but they’re meaningless if you don’t give suppliers enough profit to treat workers well,” said one former Apple executive with firsthand knowledge of the supplier responsibility group. “If you squeeze margins, you’re forcing them to cut safety.”

The Results For The 1%

A series of recent newspaper headlines tells the story of how China's working conditions benefit the 1% here.

NYT: Apple's Profit Soars‎

CBS Moneywatch: Apple shares close at record high

SF Chronicle: Apple CEO's Stock Awards Lift Compensation to $378 Million

ZDNet: Apple: made in China, untaxed profits kept offshore. We don't even get to tax the profits from moving our jobs to China, to use for schools, roads, police, etc.

The Results For The 99%

Headlines like these show how things are going better and better for the 1%. But what happened to our middle-class prosperity? We allowed companies to move jobs and factories across the borders of democracy to places where workers are exploited, calling that "trade." This enabled the breaking of unions and the weakening of our democracy.

The threat is in the air: "Shut up and take the wage cuts or we will move your job to China." How is that threat used on us? Here is an example: We have heard the stories of Mitt Romney's company Bain Capital, and how it "earned" its millions. According to the Christian Science Monitor, this is the story of what happened when a Bain-owned company "came to town":

The new owner, American Pad & Paper, owned in turn by Bain Capital, told all 258 union workers they were fired, in a cost-cutting move. Security guards hustled them out of the building. They would be able to reapply for their jobs, at lesser wages and benefits, but not all would be rehired.

Workers in countries like China where people have no say have low wages, terrible working conditions, long hours, and are told to shut up and take it or they won[t have any job at all. They are given no choice.

Increasingly workers here have their wages, hours, benefits, dignity cut and are told to shut up and take it or their jobs will be moved to China. Because we are pitted against exploited workers in countries where people have no say, we have no choice.

The unions are weakened, the government doesn't enforce or weakly enforces labor laws and regulations, age, gender or race discrimination laws, worker safety laws, so workers are placed in a terrible squeeze. Workers who try to organize unions are isolated, moved, smeared, fired, humiliated, whatever it takes.

This quote by Steve Jobs is from How the U.S. Lost Out on iPhone Work,

Not long ago, Apple boasted that its products were made in America. Today, few are. Almost all of the 70 million iPhones, 30 million iPads and 59 million other products Apple sold last year were manufactured overseas.

Why can’t that work come home? Mr. Obama asked.

Mr. Jobs’s reply was unambiguous. “Those jobs aren’t coming back,” he said, according to another dinner guest.

Democracy Brought Us Prosperity

We used to be a democracy, where everyone used to have a say in things. Because we had a say we built up a country with good schools, good infrastructure, good courts, and we made rules that said workers had to be safe, get a minimum wage, overtime, weekends… we protected the environment, we set up Social Security. We took care of each other. This made us prosperous. A share of the prosperity for the 99% was the fruit of democracy.

China, on the other hand, is not a democracy, and workers in China don't really have a say. So they don't make much money, they don't have good working conditions, the environment isn't protected, etc.

We Used To Protect Democracy

We used to protect our democracy. We used to put a tariff on goods coming in if they were made by people who didn’t have the ability to speak up and better their condition. We’d let the goods in but we would use a tariff to strengthen our country, our infrastructure, our schools – our democracy. This brought us prosperity.

For some reason, we started letting our companies move our factories over there, forcing our workers to compete with workers who have no say. We got tricked, by people who call that "trade," and said it would be good for us. (Like cutting taxes for the wealthy "job creators" is good for us.)

We opened the borders and let the big companies move the jobs, factories and industries over the border of our democracy, to places where workers don't have a say, so they are exploited. And the result was the big corporations were able to come back and cut our pay, and get rid of our pensions, and tell us, "take it, shut up, or we will move your job, too." We made the wages and working and conditions and environmental protections prosperity that democracy brings into a cost. We turned ourselves into a cost. We made democracy a competitive disadvantage.

Plutocrats Say Shed Benefits Of Democracy

Plutocrats say we need to shed the benefits of democracy and become more like China if we want to compete. They say get rid of regulations, employee protections, environmental protections, good wages, benefits like pensions and time off, etc... They say that We, the People (government) "get in the way of doing business." They say the taxes that pay for good infrastructure and schools and police and courts and services like Social Security and care for the disabled and health care for children "take money out of the economy" but they mean these take some of the money that they have been taking from the economy.

Democracy Is The Best Economics

Look at the primary target of the corporate/conservatives: unions. That should tell you something. This is a power confrontation. This is the power of the 1% overcoming the power of the 99%.

Democracy is the power of the 99% to make the decisions, and to build structures that protect us from exploitation by the wealthy and powerful. This confrontation is the story of the origin of our country -- how We, the People confronted the power and corruption of the British aristocracy, overcame that power, and built a country of, by and for the people.

Democracy and the taxes it enabled us to ask from the wealthiest is what enabled us to build the infrastructure and schools and everything that enabled our prosperity. The regulations of democracy are what enable our smaller businesses to compete with the giants. The shared prosperity -- redistribution of wealth -- is what enabled the middle class to grow, and turned us into the most prosperous country and largest market in the world.

Unions

Unions are about building up the power of groups of people, to confront and overcome the advantages of wealth and the power wealth brings to a few. When a union is strong enough to be able to confront the power of big corporations the result is that the 99% get a share of the pie. When unions are strong we all get better wages and better working conditions and a say in how we are treated, whether we are in unions or not. The benefits flow to the rest of the economy.

It would be nice if our system worked well enough that we didn't need to organize unions on top of the structure of laws and regulations, but it is just the fact of life that the wealthy and powerful and their corporations have throughout our history been able to exert tremendous influence over legislative bodies, again and again. So to fight that working people organize and build these organized unions of people, and leverage that power of the group to demand wages and benefits and weekends and a share of the prosperity. The story of the power confrontation between unions of working people (99%) and the large corporations (1%) is the story of how we built a middle class that brought us the prosperity we enjoyed.

It is not just a coincidence that the weakening of the unions coincides with the decline of the middle class. It is not just a coincidence that the current rise of the plutocrats brings in a swarm of anti-union legislation. It is not just a coincidence that the times when our democracy is strongest we all do so much better. And now, when our demcoracy has been weakened by the money and power of the 1% and their corporations, the rest of us are so much worse off.

Not US v. China

This is not about US workers and markets vs China. Working people in all countries are at risk when their countries trade with countries where workers are exploited. China's huge trade imbalance is threatening the world's economy. The loss of manufacturing to countries that exploit workers is threatening workers in many countries.

The US market is still large, and the US can still demand that imported goods be made according to better standards for workers. The rest of the world can also demand that China's workers be brought up to international standards. And we can certainly hold companies like Apple accountable, and demand that they only buy from suppliers that treat and pay workers according to international standards, because allowing companies to cheat, exploit workers and commit fraud drives the good companies out of business.

This is not about taking jobs back from Chinese workers! This is about demanding they be paid fairly and given a say in their workplaces! This is about not exploiting people there or here!

Trade can be an upward spiral, rather than a lever for exploitation of the 99% by the 1%. If Chinese workers are given a say and paid fairly then they can buy things we make and we can keep buying things they make.

Unions = Democracy = Middle Class = Shared Prosperity

Jon Stewart explains:

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Anti-Union "Right-To-Work" Laws Really A Tax On Unions

Dave Johnson — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 12:21:40 -0500

Indiana is about to pass what is called a "right-to-work" law. These laws prohibit union contracts from requiring workers to be in the union and paying dues to the union, while forcing the unions to provide full benefits to the non-unions members for free. The idea is to weaken and defund the union's (99%) ability to push back against the big corporations (1%).

CSM: With Indiana 'right to work' vote, a GOP thumb in the eye to unions,

Indiana is poised to become the first state in the upper Midwest to follow the lead of Southern "right to work" states, taking a big step Tuesday to bar unions from requiring nonunion workers to pay membership dues for representation in bargaining.

... Democrats framed the bill's passage as a political maneuver by Republicans to weaken union strength in the state.

“The only places where today’s events will be cheered is in the boardrooms of big businesses and corporations across this state," said the top House Democrat, Patrick Bauer, in a statement Tuesday. "The House Republicans just helped increase the profit margins for these companies at the expense of their workers.”

Union dues have long been a target of Republican lawmakers, who say those dues are often used to further a Democratic agenda and to elect Democrats to office. The right-to-work legislation hits unions right in their pocketbooks, reducing their ability to wield clout in elections and during negotiations over labor contracts.

Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research explains that this is really just a tax on union members, in Indiana Imposes Tax on Workers Who Support Unions,

The NYT reported that Indiana's legislature approved a measure that requires that the workers who support a union at the workplace pay for the representation of the workers who choose not to pay for the union's representation. It would have been helpful to remind readers that a union is legally obligated to represent all the workers in a bargaining unit, regardless of whether a worker has opted to join the union.

This means that non-members not only get the same wages and benefits that the union gets for its members, they also are entitled to the union's protection in the event of disputes with the employer. Most states allow workers to sign contracts that require non-union members to pay for the benefits they receive from the union.

The bill passed by Indiana's legislature prohibits unions and employers from signing this sort of contract. Instead, it requires unions to provide free representation to non-members.

So Indiana and other states say, by law, that unions have to pay for contract negotiations, have to pay for union reps to handle grievance cases, etc., and are not allowed to require those they represent and who benefit from labor contracts to join the union and pay dues.

This is just one more scam by the 1% to keep the 99% from being able to do anything about their condition.

A Win For Labor - FAA Bill Drops Anti-Union Language

Dave Johnson — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 17:24:48 -0500

There is breaking news from Capitol Hill, negotiators have dropped the anti-union language for votes to start a union. Republicans were insisting that no-shows be counted as "No" votes. Delta's check must have been mailed late.

AP: Compromise boosts prospects for FAA bill passage,

The compromise would let stand a 2010 National Mediation Board ruling allowing airline workers to form a union by a simple majority of those voting. Previously, workers who didn't vote were treated as "no" votes.
An FAA bill passed by the GOP-controlled House would have completely overturned the board's ruling. Senate Democrats opposed the provision.

Politico: Labor deal clears runway for FAA bill

Senate and House leaders reached a deal Friday on controversial labor language that has been hindering progress on a bill to keep the Federal Aviation Administration running, POLITICO has learned.
Republicans had been pushing to scrap 2010 language from the National Mediation Board that made it easier for unions to organize — but that will not be part of a new, four-year FAA bill. Under the old policy, no-shows at union votes were counted as “no” votes

“The NMB rule stands,” a Senate aide told POLITICO. “The bill we are moving toward is a four-year authorization. We don’t have total agreement on all the issues. It’s likely we will still need a patch to get us over.”

From Tuesday's post, Congress Is Back, Republicans Again Threaten Shutdowns For 1% Agenda,

Congress is back in session and Republicans are right back to shutdown threats. Once again Republicans are trying to use shutdown threats to bust unions (the 99%), once again doing it for pay, for a specific company (the 1%).

Funding for the Federal Aviation Administration runs out and the agency is threatened with being shut down again January 31. Republicans demand that Congress pass a union-busting provision for Delta Airlines in the FAA "reauthorization" (funding) bill or they will shut the agency down again. Delta wants a provision in the FAA funding bill that changes union election rules to say that any worker who doesn't vote be counted as a 'no' vote, against joining the union. This is because flight attendants (the 99%) are trying to organize a union, and Delta management (the 1%) is trying to block them from doing so.

Past posts leading up to this:

Nov. 29, 2011: Will Republicans Shut Down The FAA Again To Help Delta's Union Busting?

Nov. 15: 2011: Government Shutdowns Get The 1% What They Want

August 3, 2011: Delta's Greed Helps Shut Down The FAA

July 26, 1022: Think Default Threat Is A Yawn? The FAA Is Still Shut Down

July 22, 2011: The Hostage-Taking Just Keeps Coming - This Time The FAA Shuts Down

There's more, I'm sure, but you get the idea. Help spread the word that this FAA fight is about union (the 99%) organizing rights and the effort to preserve a middle class.

Congress Is Back, Republicans Again Threaten Shutdowns For 1% Agenda

Dave Johnson — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:04:03 -0500

Congress is back in session and Republicans are right back to shutdown threats. Once again Republicans are trying to use shutdown threats to bust unions (the 99%), once again doing it for pay, for a specific company (the 1%).

Funding for the Federal Aviation Administration runs out and the agency is threatened with being shut down again January 31. Republicans demand that Congress pass a union-busting provision for Delta Airlines in the FAA "reauthorization" (funding) bill or they will shut the agency down again. Delta wants a provision in the FAA funding bill that changes union election rules to say that any worker who doesn't vote be counted as a 'no' vote, against joining the union. This is because flight attendants (the 99%) are trying to organize a union, and Delta management (the 1%) is trying to block them from doing so.

Politico: Transportation bills abound as Congress returns,

[FAA] Funding expires in exactly two weeks, and Congress had 4½ months since the last stopgap to work on a new long-term bill, the most breathing room since 2009. Optimism on getting a new four-year bill persisted until winter set in, when it was revealed controversial National Mediation Board language over how union election votes are interpreted forced negotiations between Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).

TPM: Labor Targets Vulnerable House Republicans Over Union-Busting Bill

The House and Senate have been grappling for months over a provision in the House GOP’s FAA reauthorization bill that would count abstentions as “no” votes when airline and rail workers want to form a union. Democrats were once thought likely to cave on the issue, but have held their ground on the issue as the public has soured on GOP-driven shutdown threats.

This has been going on for some time, and the best way to stop this nonsense is to spread awareness. Here are some past posts on this:

Nov. 29, 2011: Will Republicans Shut Down The FAA Again To Help Delta's Union Busting?

Nov. 15: 2011: Government Shutdowns Get The 1% What They Want

August 3, 2011: Delta's Greed Helps Shut Down The FAA

July 26, 1022: Think Default Threat Is A Yawn? The FAA Is Still Shut Down

July 22, 2011: The Hostage-Taking Just Keeps Coming - This Time The FAA Shuts Down

There's more, I'm sure, but you get the idea. Help spread the word that this FAA fight is about union (the 99%) organizing rights and the effort to preserve a middle class.

India And Philippines Declare War On Call Center Bill

Dave Johnson — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 13:10:36 -0500

Last month I wrote about a bill before Congress that would both help fight the offshoring of call-center jobs and protect consumers. Now the countries where we have been sending those jobs are organizing a lobbying campaign to fight the bill.

The Bill

There is a bipartisan bill before Congress, The U.S. Call Center Worker and Consumer Protection Act, that would let the public know which companies are engaging in sending jobs out of the country, let customers ask to use an American call center instead, and ban federal grants or guaranteed loans to American companies that move call center jobs out of the US. In Call-Center Bill Would Let Customers Ask To Talk To Americans, I wrote about some of the specifics and the reason the bill is needed,

Today many call-center jobs are being moved out of the country to India and the Philippines. This costs American jobs, and can be very frustrating to consumers who have to speak to people who they cannot understand because of language problems or cultural differences. The The U.S. Call Center Worker and Consumer Protection Act gives consumers the right to ask where the person they are speaking with is based, and ask for an American-based representative instead. Among the things this bill would accomplish:

Require the Department of Labor to publicly list firms that move call center jobs overseas.
Make these firms ineligible for any direct or indirect federal loans or loan guarantees for five years.
Require 120 day advance notification of a proposed move off-shore.
Require call center employees to tell U.S. consumers where they are located, if asked.
Require that call centers transfer calls to a U.S. call center if asked.

Lobbying Campaign

India and the Philippines are organizing a lobbying campaign here -- yes, foreign countries lobby Congress to take our jobs -- to keep this bill from even being considered. An article in The Hindu explains,

India's ambassador to the United States Nirupama Rao said that India would work to protect its business interests in the context of a proposed U.S. legislation against outsourcing call centre works to countries, including India.

The Manila Bulletin gets specific,

President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III was urged to create and send a strong contingent of Filipinos that would persuade lawmakers in the US Congress to stop the passage of a bill that could kill the US$9-billion business processing outsourcing (BPO) in the country.

Eastern Samar Rep. Ben Evardone, chairman of the House Committee on Public Information, lamented that US House Bill No. 3596 or the Call Center and Consumers Protection Bill will discourage American companies from outsourcing services in other countries like the Philippines.

“We have to act immediately by sending a strong lobby team in the US. I believe this will kill the BPO industry in the country,” Evardone said.

In, Anti-Outsourcing Bill Stirs Fears In India, Philippines at the Huffington Post, Dave Jamieson quotes Rep. Tim Bishop's (D-N.Y.) reaction to this effort by India and the Philippines,

When asked about such reactions, Bishop said that the fears in India and the Philippines reinforce the argument for the legislation.

"Frankly, the fact that both the Indian government and the Filipino government are reacting like this says that our bill is very badly needed," he said. Most of the call center jobs lost in the U.S. are "sent primarily to India and the Philippines. So I hope [the bill] does have an impact."

... While discussing the call center legislation last month, Bishop said that "outsourcing is one of the scourges of our economy and one of the reasons we are struggling to knock down the unemployment rate and reduce the number of Americans who are out of work ... We can't prohibit it, but we can certainly discourage it."

Consumer Protection

This is not just an offshoring issue, it is also a consumer-protection issue. In Who Protects Info You Give To Offshored Call Centers?, I wrote about a study showing that offshoring of call centers causes us to lose protections on our privacy and financial information,

Not JUST Jobs Lost -- Data Privacy Is Lost, Too

A new study by the Communication Workers of America backs up the need for that bill. The report is called, Why Shipping Call Center Jobs Overseas Hurts Us Back Home. The study found that offshoring call-centers undoes protection of Americans’ private information. Personal data can be available to people who could use it for criminal purposes. Also, once information is sent across borders governments do not need warrants to collect this info.

The full text of the bill is available here:

H.R.3596 - To require a publicly available a list of all employers that relocate a call center overseas and to make such companies ineligible for Federal grants or guaranteed loans and to require disclosure of the physical location of business agents engaging in customer service communications.

President Sidesteps GOP Obstruction With Consumer And Workers' Rights Appointments!

Dave Johnson — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 16:01:22 -0500

President Obama moved an obstructing GOP out of the way earlier today, announcing that he was making a recess appointment to get the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) up and running. Later, the White House announced he is doing the same to get the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) up and running again as well.

TAKE ACTION

Tell President Obama, "I've got your back." Support his decision to buck Republican obstruction and make recess appointments to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and National Labor Relations Board.

Wall Street-backed Republicans are going to scream and squeal and throw the usual hissy fit. You should just ignore them and thank President Obama for taking the right action to protect us as workers and as consumers. Here's why.

CFPB: Protecting Americans From Wall Street Scams, Schemes And Swindles

President Obama has made a recess appointment of Richard Cordray to the CFPB -- "America’s consumer watchdog." This means that the new agency can get going on its mission to protect citizens from Wall Street scams, schemes and swindles.

Until now Republicans had vowed to block any nominee from heading up the agency in order to keep the new agency from getting up and running. They didn't object to the qualifications of the nominee, they objected to the job that the agency is supposed to do under the law, namely protect American citizens from the various scams, schemes and swindles that Wall Street comes up with to defraud unsuspecting consumers.

Making this appointment, the President said,

The only reason Republicans in the Senate have blocked Richard is because they don’t agree with the law setting up the consumer watchdog. They want to weaken it. Well that makes no sense at all. Does anyone think the reason we got in such a financial mess was because of too much oversight? Of course not. We shouldn’t be weakening oversight and accountability. We should be strengthening it – especially when it comes to looking out for families like yours. Financial firms have armies of lobbyists in Washington looking out for their interests. It’s time someone fought for you, too.

He also said he is "obligated" to do this,

"When Congress refuses to act and as a result hurts our economy and puts people at risk, I have an obligation as president to do what I can without them," Obama said "I have an obligation to act on behalf of the American people."

The same logic holds true for the NLRB, an agency trying to do its job protecting working people from exploitation by huge, wealthy, powerful multinational companies.

NLRB - Protecting Workers From Big-Company Exploitation

Republicans have also been obstructing the NLRB from operating by refusing to confirm nominees -- any nominees, regardless of qualification. Just as with the CFPB, they don't object to the nominees, they object to the mission of the NLRB under the law.

As a result of this objection the NLRB was effectively shut down as of the first of the year, unable to do its job protecting American workers from exploitation.

The mission of the NLRB, by law, is "to protect the rights of employees and employers, to encourage collective bargaining, and to curtail certain private sector labor and management practices, which can harm the general welfare of workers, businesses and the U.S. economy." Republicans object to the purpose of the law itself, so they are obstructing its enforcement.

In a statement this afternoon President Obama announced he was appointing to the NLRB Sharon Block, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Congressional Affairs at the U.S. Department of Labor; Terence F. Flynn, currently detailed to serve as Chief Counsel to NLRB Board Member Brian Hayes; and a former counsel in the Labor and Employment Group of Crowell & Moring LLP; and Richard Griffin, the General Counsel for the International Union of Operating Engineers.

Republicans Scream And Squeal: It's What They Do

Republicans are going to throw their usual hissy fit -- it's what they do. So while they're doing that, let's look at the facts about recess appointments. From Mother Jones, Chart of The Day: Presidential Recess Appointments:

The chart says all that needs to be said about the Republican hissy fit over Obama's recess appointments.

Mr. President, we have your back. We support you for making recess appointments to get the CFPB and NLRB up and running again! Good job!

If you agree, click this link and let President Obama know.

NLRB Updates - Boeing Resolved, Union Elections Streamlined, Republicans Say Hurts "Job Creators"

Dave Johnson — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 12:53:47 -0500

There is news on the NLRB front. First, Boeing and its union have resolved the dispute that got the NLRB involved. Second, the NLRB voted yesterday to move forward with rules speeding up union certification elections. Third, House Republicans passed a bill to block the NLRB action to let workers vote on having a union, saying it would "hurt job creation" and that "job creators" would be hurt -- but it won't pass the Senate and the President won't sign it.

Oh, and Mitt Romney blasted unions, the NLRB and President Obama.

Boeing

Seattle Times; Boeing, union seal deal for jets, jobs, peace,

The landmark agreement unveiled Wednesday by the Machinists union and Boeing should secure thousands of local jobs, end the simmering NLRB lawsuit, and offer an unexpected Christmas bonus to start off a four-year contract extension.

Beyond all that, though, the surprise pact may signify a new era for two forces whose bitter adversarial relationship and recurring clashes have repeatedly shaken the region and endangered one of its economic cornerstones.

[. . .] If the contract is ratified, the Machinists will notify the NLRB that "our issues with the Boeing Company are behind us," Wroblewski said.

Lafe Solomon, acting general counsel at the NLRB, issued a statement calling the deal "a very significant and hopeful development," and suggesting he is ready to act once the deal is finalized.

Union Election Rules

WSJ: Rule to Speed Union Votes Moves Forward,

The National Labor Relations Board on Wednesday approved a scaled-back version of a proposal that would speed up union-organizing elections, in a vote marked by dissent from the board's lone Republican.

The approval of the rules clears the way for the board to draft a final federal rule that would usher in some of the most sweeping changes to the union-organizing election process since 1947. The vote was 2-1, with the board's two Democratic appointees approving a measure that was embraced by unions but opposed by business groups and congressional Republicans.

House Passes Bill To Block Union Elections Rule

The Hill: House rebukes labor board in effort to check ‘rogue’ agency,

The House passed legislation Wednesday to block a proposed rule by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that would speed up union elections.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.), chairman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee, passed the chamber 235-188. Only six Democrats voted for it, while eight Republicans voted against it.

... Other Republicans said the proposed rule would hurt job creation. "The rogue majority of the NLRB wants to set conditions that stifle job creation and expansion," Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) said. "Job creators are terrified of the NLRB's actions to create an ambush-style election process that will prevent employees from making an informed decision."

But Democrats argued that the bill would do nothing to help create jobs, and would delay what should be a right that workers have to unionize.

Take a look at TheMiddleClass.org's take on the bill (H.R. 3094) Workforce Democracy and Fairness Act, (hint: it will hurt the middle class):

H.R. 3094 would allow employers to continue to use the NLRB hearing process to essentially filibuster a union organizing effort by raising frivolous or meaningless issues, up to the final stages of the hearing process. During this period of delay, employers would have full access to workers with their anti-union message while the union would not have access to the workers on-site to counter the message.

Workers would also lose their ability to determine which employee positions—in labor law parlance, their “community of interest”— would be included in their bargaining unit. A common tactic used by employers to undermine union organizing drives is to attempt to involve employees with unrelated job functions in an effort to dilute support for the union. The NLRB had ruled that a health care facility that attempted to use this tactic to prevent nursing assistants from joining a union was out of bounds. This legislation puts this tactic back into employers’ anti-union toolbox.

About TheMiddleClass.org: "TheMiddleClass.org provides information and analysis on bills in Congress that have a significant impact (positive or negative) on America's middle class, as well as on the aspirations of low-income Americans who want to work their way into the middle class. It also enables voters to evaluate members of Congress based on their votes on these bills."

Romney

Oh, and in a follow-up to yesterday's post about the coordinated corporate/conservative/lobbyist swarm, Coordinated Attack On Unions From Republicans And Corporate/Conservative Machine, this in the news:

The Hill: Romney blasts 'out-of-control' NLRB,

Republican Mitt Romney on Wednesday slammed the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for their vote to proceed with a rule allowing "quickie" elections.

“President Obama’s out-of-control labor board continues to trample on the rights of workers, the interests of job creators, and the rule of law," he said in a statement released by his presidential campaign. "The NLRB’s unprecedented proposal to force employees into ‘quickie’ union elections will benefit only union bosses, while preventing employees from making an informed decision about unionization and preventing employers from challenging illegal union activity."

Previous Coverage

Mr. President, Adjourn The Congress And Fill Vacancies

Adjourn and Appoint! We Can’t Wait – For Recess Appointments

NLRB V. Boeing: Corporations Fear Law Itself

NLRB Success Shows Value Of Recess Appointments

Isaiah Poole: Conservative War On Workers Continues With Gutting Of Labor Board

Corporations Lose Love Of "Secret Ballot" After NLRB Proposal For Fair Union Elections