• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Federal appeals court strikes down union notification requirement

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
Employers cannot be required to post a notice that tells their workers they have a right to join a union and bargain for better wages, a federal appeals court ruled in the latest setback for the National Labor Relations Board.The so-called poster rule would have required more than 6 million private employers to post a one-page notice in a prominent place. Labor leaders hoped it would help stem the long decline in union membership in the private sector. Only about 7% of private-sector employees belong to unions.
But in a 3-0 decision Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled the NLRB had overstepped its authority by requiring this "notification of employee rights."
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]This year, the same conservative-leaning court ruled that President [/FONT]Obama[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]'s recess appointments to the labor board were illegal.
[/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Read more @: [/FONT]Federal appeals court strikes down union notification requirement - latimes.com

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]More and more anti labor decisions and acts. When will it ever end? The National Assn. of Manufacturers called these posters "aggressive".. How is posting something on a wall notifying people of their rights "aggressive"? We might as well take down minimum wage posters, workplace safety posters now as well, since hey you know they notify people of their rights..[/FONT]
 
Where's Obama now that you need him?

All I hear about is the unholy alliance between the Unions and Obama. So how is this possible? Doesn't he control everything?


[/COLOR][/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Read more @: [/FONT]Federal appeals court strikes down union notification requirement - latimes.com

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]More and more anti labor decisions and acts. When will it ever end? The National Assn. of Manufacturers called these posters "aggressive".. How is posting something on a wall notifying people of their rights "aggressive"? We might as well take down minimum wage posters, workplace safety posters now as well, since hey you know they notify people of their rights..[/FONT]
 
Wait a sec, the NLRB wanted to force employers to put up posts telling workers that they can join unions and bargain for better wages? What? Will workers be required to tell employers the lowest wage they are willing to work for? Remember, we need to be fair.
 
Wait a sec, the NLRB wanted to force employers to put up posts telling workers that they can join unions and bargain for better wages? What? Will workers be required to tell employers the lowest wage they are willing to work for? Remember, we need to be fair.

:doh
Are you saying there are no minimum wage posters in a workplace? Cuz every place i have worked at i see this somewhere
30rny4l.jpg


Or are you saying that workers have to tell their employees the lowest wage they will work for? As in physically tell? Because if so that would be impossible to enforce and make no sense and makes no connection in these two scenarios.
 
[/COLOR][/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Read more @: [/FONT]Federal appeals court strikes down union notification requirement - latimes.com

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]More and more anti labor decisions and acts. When will it ever end? The National Assn. of Manufacturers called these posters "aggressive".. How is posting something on a wall notifying people of their rights "aggressive"? We might as well take down minimum wage posters, workplace safety posters now as well, since hey you know they notify people of their rights..[/FONT]

The NLRB does not have the right to do this. It was the correct decision. From the part you did not quote: "Most workplaces include a variety of notices telling employees of their rights under the law, but business lawyers said Congress did not give the NLRB a similar authority. They said the labor board is supposed to act as a referee or judge in disputes between management and labor, not as an advocate for more union organizing." (emphasis added)
 
The NLRB does not have the right to do this. It was the correct decision. From the part you did not quote: "Most workplaces include a variety of notices telling employees of their rights under the law, but business lawyers said Congress did not give the NLRB a similar authority. They said the labor board is supposed to act as a referee or judge in disputes between management and labor, not as an advocate for more union organizing." (emphasis added)

Simply informing workers of their rights is "advocating more union organizing"?
 
Simply informing workers of their rights is "advocating more union organizing"?

since you think not requiring them to is anti-union, yes. BTW, they do not have a right to a union, just the right to try to unionize. Can't have a union of 1.
 
since you think not requiring them to is anti-union, yes. BTW, they do not have a right to a union, just the right to try to unionize. Can't have a union of 1.

No. I said no "its anti labor" meaning that notifying people of their basic work rights is against labor rights as a whole union and non union alike.
So tell me again how is simply informing workers of their rights is "advocating more union organizing"?
 
:doh
Are you saying there are no minimum wage posters in a workplace? Cuz every place i have worked at i see this somewhere


Or are you saying that workers have to tell their employees the lowest wage they will work for? As in physically tell? Because if so that would be impossible to enforce and make no sense and makes no connection in these two scenarios.

That just doesn't make any sense at all.
 
show me where labor is in the constitution.

there only 18 duties for congress....its not on the list.

:roll:
So how are unions and the right to join a union unconstitutional?
 
Are people supporting this decision also against reading Miranda rights?
 
No. I said no "its anti labor" meaning that notifying people of their basic work rights is against labor rights as a whole union and non union alike.
So tell me again how is simply informing workers of their rights is "advocating more union organizing"?
Since when is it the responsibility of the employer to promote unionization?

This is exactly what the court ruled on and they ruled correctly.
 
Perhaps instead of spending their money collected via union dues on politicians, they should be spending it on recruiting new union members. If the unions produced bettter results and offered a better product, their numbers wouldn't be dwindling into irrelevency.

And this seems something the Congress or the Department of Labor should institute via legislation or regulation. Court got this one right, this is well beyond NLRB's scope and purpose.
 
NLRB...unconstitutional

Seeing as there was a time when union organizers would be beaten and killed, I can understand how keeping the general peace would necessitate making sure things like that don't happen again.
 
Seeing as there was a time when union organizers would be beaten and killed, I can understand how keeping the general peace would necessitate making sure things like that don't happen again.

Yeah, but that would be the state government's duty, not the feds. That is if you agree that the NLRB is unconstitutional.
 
Seeing as there was a time when union organizers would be beaten and killed, I can understand how keeping the general peace would necessitate making sure things like that don't happen again.

That road runs both ways, Hobo. I know one man who was shot and killed by union thugs because he chose to drive a coal truck to feed his family despite a strike; my next door neighbor had his two front picture windows taken out by Teamster thugs when he did the same.
 
In today's information age, is it unreasonable to assume people cant educate themselves on what their union organizing rights are?

Or alternately contact UAW, UMW, Teamsters, SEIU or any other large union organization via phone and find out what's what.

It should not be the responsibility of the employer to tell workers what they need to do to organize a union, that should be on the unions.
 
Since when is it the responsibility of the employer to promote unionization?

This is exactly what the court ruled on and they ruled correctly.

How is posting people their rights "promoteing unionization"?
 
How is posting people their rights "promoteing unionization"?
Can unionized employers, like most federal and state workers for instance, exercise that same "right" to post that employees could choose NOT TO join the union? Is this type of notification something that you would find on the bulletin board in the teachers lounge?
 
Can unionized employers, like most federal and state workers for instance, exercise that same "right" to post that employees could choose NOT TO join the union?
Yes. Just because you have the right to join the union it does not mean you have to join or try to unionize. You can choose not to be in a union.
 
[/COLOR][/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Read more @: [/FONT]Federal appeals court strikes down union notification requirement - latimes.com

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]More and more anti labor decisions and acts. When will it ever end? The National Assn. of Manufacturers called these posters "aggressive".. How is posting something on a wall notifying people of their rights "aggressive"? We might as well take down minimum wage posters, workplace safety posters now as well, since hey you know they notify people of their rights..[/FONT]

Perhaps if unions hadn't abused their position over the years they might still be thriving. However, since many unions become entrenched and then spend all their time on feathering the union leadership's pockets and conducting political campaigns, they've lost their reason for existence. Most intelligent workers have come to understand that with the abundance of government legislation/protections in place they've got better ways to spend their hard earned money than on union dues.
 
Back
Top Bottom