AWF Calls Out NMB, NLRB to Comply with Executive Order
Christopher Prandoni, executive director of the Alliance for Worker Freedom, sent letters today to the heads of the National Medation Board (NMB) and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which have both been instumental in advancing pro-union, anti-employer regulations over the last several months. Mr. Prandoni challenged the NMB and NLRB to abide by President Obama's recent executive order to reform and streamline burdensome federal regulations. In addition, he requested information as to how the boards planned to implement the President's mandate, citing examples of the biased and unwieldy rulings that they have recently produced.
To Harry Hoglander, Chairman of the NMB:
"Issued to facilitate “economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation,” Executive Order 13563 requires federal agencies to scrutinize their regulatory policies. President Obama laid out a series of requirements that all regulations need to meet—below are selected excerpts.
Relevant Sections of Executive Order 13563
• Section 2: Regulations must “be adopted through a process that includes public participation.”
• Section 4: Regulations will “reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public.”
• Section 6: Requires a process of retrospective analysis and repeal of rules in conflict with the Order’s stated principles.
Specifically, I am inquiring as to whether or not the Board’s recent “Minority Rule” decision (29 CFR Part 1202 and 1206) complies with the above sections of Executive Order 13563. The NMB rule changed awarded a union representation powers after a majority of voting workers voted for the union, not a majority of all employees."
To Wilma B. Liebman, Chairman of the NLRB:
"I would like to inquire how the NLRB plans to implement Executive Order 13563 in light of its impending decisions. For example, your proposed rulemaking from late December which penalizes employers for not promoting union activity in their business [Proposed Rulemaking, 29 CFR Part 104 – RIN 3142—AA07] seems to violate the “freedom of choice” ordered by the President. Similarly, the obligation to allow union organizers access to private property [Roundy’s vs. Milwaukee Building and Construction Trades (Case No. 30-CA-17185)] would appear to infringe on employer’s property rights. The requirement to supply union organizers with names and addresses of employees tilts the playing field too far in favor of collective bargaining, and opens the door to union intimidation and harassment. [Memorandum GC 11-01]"
Comments