The NLRB’s No Good Very Bad Complaint

It's hard to be inspired by the Republican field for President, but I am guessing that that is not where the Obama campaign is looking right now. They are looking at states like Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida. They are looking to squeeze out a victory next year.

To engage in a bit of raw speculation, if Obama loses, it may be his own National Labor Relations Board that done him in. Here is the story from the New York Times:

It may be a difficult case to prove, but the complaint filed last month by the National Labor Relations Board against Boeing is a welcome effort to defend workers' right to collective bargaining.

The N.L.R.B. is accusing the company of setting up a nonunion production line in South Carolina to retaliate against unionized workers in Washington State for striking. The board wants to force Boeing to make all of its new Dreamliner jets in Washington, rather than make 30 percent of them at the new line in Charleston.

The case hinges on proving Boeing's intent. It is illegal to retaliate against workers for striking — there have been four strikes at the Washington facility since 1989 — or threaten workers in order to discourage strikes. But the company can decide to locate production in South Carolina because it makes business sense and may include "production stability" as a factor in its decision.

A corporate lawyer I am not. I don't have the wardrobe or the cars. It seems pretty clear that Boeing can establish legitimate motives for opening a factory in Charleston. To prove the case, I would think, you would have to distinguish between a strategy to pressure the union in Washington State and a strategy to have a place to build airplanes during a strike. That looks like a tall order.

The bigger problem is that the NLRB is not just acting against Boeing; it is acting against South Carolina in favor of Washington State. That is constitutionally dubious. The Founders were very concerned to prevent the Federal Government from using its powers to favor some states over others. I wouldn't expect Obama to know about that.

I would expect him to guess that this is politically problematic. From the Wall Street Journal:

The National Labor Relations Board's acting general counsel will testify under duress at a congressional hearing in South Carolina where he is expected to face a barrage of questions from Republicans on the complaint his agency filed against Boeing Co. alleging labor-law violations.

The House Oversight Committee will press the question whether it is the business of the NLRB to tell companies where they can locate new factories and discourage them, in these times, from building new ones and hiring new workers. Boeing's is apparently hiring in Washington and South Carolina. Does the Administration really want to prevent to the latter? The answer is yes, and I am guessing that the House committee will point that out.

But it gets better. See The Volokh Conspiracy:

Law.com reports that the attorneys general of sixteen states have filed an amicus brief supporting Boeing against the National Labor Relations Board. Although the Boeing-NLRB dispute has become something of a partisan issue, the brief represents AGs from both parties and both right-to-work and non-right-to-work states. It was co-authored by the AGs from Texas and South Carolina, and joined by those from Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia and Wyoming.

Explaining the reason for the brief, SC AG Alan Wilson said in a press release: "Unless deterred, the NLRB's unprecedented proceedings against a company's private business decisions will cause irreparable harm to the business climate in every state and will undoubtedly create an exodus of jobs from our country."

I highlight the presence of my own dear state on that list. The NLRB action is clearly a threat to the prerogative of state governments to order their institutions as they are allowed to do under the Constitution and Federal Law.

According to legend, a priest was summoned to Machiavelli's bed, against his wishes, as he lay dying. "Do you renounce Devil and all his works", the priest asked, three times. Machiavelli finally sighed and broke his silence. "Father," he said, "this does not seem to me like a good time to make new enemies."

The NLRB complaint is not the kind of thing that a lot of voters pay attention to. It does give the House Republicans a chance to rake the administration over the coals about job creation. It has stirred another collection of state governments into action against the Administration over its policies. Obama isn't going to carry South Carolina but he did carry North Carolina last time. People in the latter state might notice that the Obama Administration tried to kill a really big factory just to their south.

Maybe the unions are the angels and Boeing and the sixteen states are the devils. Still, is this really a good time for Obama to be making new enemies?

Comments

[Dave]

Funny because the president of Boing said they were opening the new plant in SC to thwart the unions... Thus, the violation...

[duggersd]

Dave, please find that quote. I heard Boeing said that due to the labor stoppages and other factors, they were building the plant in NC. That is a legitimate reason. Also, Boeing is hiring in WA as well as NC. If the NLRB insists on continuing this persecution, if I were Boeing, I would fold the corporation and sell it to another "entity", maybe Gnieob. And then I would do as I pleased as the new company. This complaint by the NLRB has no bearing other than supporting labor unions and supporting a state that is likely to go Obama over another one that is likely to go to anybody else. Last time I checked, Obama is President of the United States and not just the states that supported him.

[RNB]

"...the president of Boing said they were opening the new plant in SC to thwart the unions..."

"Boeing," not "Boing."

The CEO (not president) of Boeing said the company could not afford "strikes happening every three or four years in Puget Sound." A Boeing management memo said the company wanted to "reduce vulnerability to delivery disruptions caused by work stoppages."

No workers in Seattle were fired. No existing work was moved to South Carolina. No reduction in work at Seattle-area plants is planned.

I guess you're right that Boeing's intent was to "thwart the unions," if the union's intent is to wreck Boeing's bottom line and eventually drive it into bankruptcy. But it's hard to see why the federal government should believe that it is a crime not to cooperate in one's own destruction.

[Ken Blanchard]

Donald: by that standard, any steps taking to keep the company afloat during a strike would be illegal.

[Dave]

For a more objective overview of the whole thing go here: http://www.propublica.org/blog/item/primer-in-labor-board-dispute-with-boeing-growing-controversy-clouds-facts

[Auth]

Does aonnye or has aonnye that works for this committee ever worked not knowing if you are going to tommorow? I doubt it, have any of you ever worked for a company that has a plant somewhere else that the people make 3 times what you make? I doubt it. The only thing right th work protects is the company and the politicans that get kick backs from the company. In south carolina that would be Haley ( 150K dontaed by Boeing for her ball), Demint, and Grahm. Has aonnye thought to ask the people of there states what they want? Or perhaps let them choose? I doubt it since being a politican today requires you know or leave any where near your prople. Its a shame the way people get on the high horses and bath mouth the working class. I dint think I would live to see a day when the governement spent millions to see if athletes lie about seroids and politicans dont even care about any class except the upper.

[Galadak]

AAAAAAA i loved the first video! It's so sweet and my favorite song too! I loved where you kept fiatolng in the air from all the jumps :)And the second one is soooo much better faster and to the beat!Awesome vids, Amanda!