I am surprised that TJE has not yet posted this article. Last week, the National Labor Relations Board told Boeing Co. that Boeing cannot build a new factory in South Carolina (a right to work state), but must instead build the factory in Washington state (which has unions). The reason? A Boeing official said that the company could not afford another work stoppage (not a problem in South Carolina). The NLRB immediately condemned this as unlawful employer speech. I am amazed that the NLRB has the audacity to try and tell a private company where it can build its own factory. Needless to say, Boeing has appealed the decision.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
More Government Overreach
I am surprised that TJE has not yet posted this article. Last week, the National Labor Relations Board told Boeing Co. that Boeing cannot build a new factory in South Carolina (a right to work state), but must instead build the factory in Washington state (which has unions). The reason? A Boeing official said that the company could not afford another work stoppage (not a problem in South Carolina). The NLRB immediately condemned this as unlawful employer speech. I am amazed that the NLRB has the audacity to try and tell a private company where it can build its own factory. Needless to say, Boeing has appealed the decision.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I think I agree with your conclusions but I don't really have a full understanding of what happened here. I wish the Examiner would give some sort of explanation of the reasoning behind the NLRB's decision, because they seem to just be promoting one side as they regularly do. Is this project part of a government contract? I don't know if that makes the decision right, but it could help explain it a little more. I don't know how direct a role Obama actually played in this, the Examiner article seems to think it was a dominant one, but we all know he is an intelligent and pretty honest guy. So I have to believe that there is some legitimate reasoning behind this decision. I still don't agree with it, but I also don't think the Examiner and this author are telling the whole story.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/04/22/boeing_nrlb_unions_labor_government_white_house_obama_administration_south_carolina_109635.html
Alright, I just read the NYTimes piece on this and I think the case comes down to whether the decision to move is a retaliation against the Unions for striking in 2008 (which would be illegal) or whether it was a decision purely motivated by economic interests (legal). Seems like a mix of both, but I think it should be legal and that it is especially stupid seeing that Boeing has already built their factory in SC. Definitely overreach.
Yes, I think you are right. Although, I have a more difficult time seeing this as "punishment" in any form. I suppose it could be construed as such in the sense that the Union workers in Washington are being "punished" by not having a new place to work (or a new place for their fellow union workers to work). If the workers had not gone on strike would Boeing have opened the factory in Washington state? Maybe. But only because they would have no idea of the money they would lose if the union went on strike. I am therefore skeptical that this should be construed as punishment. It is simply good business to open up the plant in South Carolina. What I think is more unnerving is the power of the NLRB (or at least their belief in their power). There are real problems facing workers in America and it seems really foolish for them to waste resources trying to tackle this particular issue.
Yeah, total waste of their time and I don't know why unions would push the NLRB to do this when it is so blatantly stupid on its face. Makes them, their advocates on the NLRB and Obama look like idiots.
http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/04/28/attorneys-general-battle-nlrb-over-boeing-plant
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703778104576287290266016016.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
Post a Comment