Obama’s Specious Decree to Business: Hire Workers Already


By Fed Up

After reading this article I wonder how much this will cost Jobs here in America, I think Companies should have a say where they want to locate, as long as they stay right here in this Country, but if they can’t then they will continue to move out of this Country, if the unions can’t see what they are doing then we will keep losing job to Foreign Countries.

It is time to stop and see what is happening to this Country, but it not all the union, but they are not helping, but we can’t for get greedy CEOs and BOARD of DIRECTORS.

It is time to stop going for higher wage and big packages, we need jobs, if we keep going the way we are we will no longer have a free Country.

================================================================================================================================

By Gary Bauer
5/16/2011

After hearing tales of economic woe from unemployed Americans at last Thursday’s town hall event in Washington, D.C., President Obama issued a decree to American business:  It’s time to “step up” and begin hiring new workers.

It’s as if Obama believes American businesses were just waiting for him to green-light what many companies doubtless would like to do but cannot—largely because of the President’s own job-stifling policies.

Some companies have been stepping up and hiring workers only to see Obama appointees demand that they be let go.  In one particularly egregious case, Republican legislators are fighting back to save not only thousands of American jobs, but also the right of American companies to do business without fear of union retribution.

Several years ago, Boeing was searching for a place to build a $1 billion factory to construct its new 787 Dreamliner airplanes.  After an extensive search, the airplane manufacturer winnowed the decision about where to build the plant down to two locations.

The choice was between Everett, Washington, where Boeing had another plant and whose workers are unionized, and North Charleston, South Carolina, one of 22 “right-to-work” states, which have laws that prohibit mandatory union membership.

Boeing engaged Everett union leaders to see whether a deal could be worked out on issues including wages and benefits, and a long-term strike clause.  (Boeing had been crippled by four Everett union employee strikes since 1989.)

After months of negotiations, a deal could not be arranged in Everett.  So in October 2009, Boeing chose Charleston for its new plant.

A year and a half later, a new plant has been built, and one thousand new workers have been hired and begun training to start building planes in July.

But late last month, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) filed a complaint against Boeing.  It alleged that the company had, in the words of Boeing head Jim McNerney, “improperly transferred existing work, and that our decision reflected ‘animus’ and constituted ‘retaliation’ against union-represented employees in Washington State.”

The NLRB claims Boeing’s decision to locate in South Carolina was retaliation against Everett union workers for their past strikes.  It wants Boeing to abandon its already-built South Carolina plant and its more than one thousand workers, and build a new assembly line back in Washington State.

But, as McNerney has pointed out, “No existing work is being transferred to South Carolina, and not a single union member in Washington has been adversely affected by this decision.”

This would seem to be an open-and-shut case.  But Boeing may lose.  The NLRB has scheduled a hearing for June 14 in Seattle, home to the company’s unionized production operations.  Michael Luttig, Boeing’s general counsel, recently said, “Presumptively, I do expect to lose.”

If that happens, the case may find its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.  But that could take years.

An NLRB win would set a disastrous precedent.  It would effectively forbid companies with plants in union states from building new plants in right-to-work states.

In a recent Senate hearing, Sen. Mike Enzi (R.-Wyo.) remarked about the NLRB decision, “This is not the way to encourage new job creation in the U.S., or even keep the jobs we currently have.”

The precedent may force more American companies to set up operations outside the U.S.  It’s already a growing trend.  A recently released Commerce Department study found that U.S. companies increasingly hire abroad and fire at home.

According to the data, over the last decade, American multinational corporations decreased domestic employment by 2.9 million workers while adding 2.4 million jobs overseas.

Senate Republicans are fighting back against the NLRB’s claims.  Last Thursday, Senators Lamar Alexander (R.-Tenn.), Lindsey Graham (R.-S.C.) and Jim DeMint (R.-S.C.) introduced the Job Protection Act.

The legislation would prohibit the NLRB from ordering companies to relocate jobs.  It would also protect companies’ freedom to discuss the costs of having a unionized workforce without fear of retribution.

“This is not just about South Carolina, and it’s not just about making airplanes,” Alexander said in announcing the new bill.  “[T]his is about jobs in every state in the country, and whether or not manufacturers are going to be able to make in the United States what they sell in the United States.”

The NLRB, comprised of a five-person board and general counsel, is appointed by the President, and it reflects the President’s contempt for free markets.  The President’s economic agenda is rooted in the mistaken belief that government can do a better job of picking winners and losers than can the free enterprise system.

But with the unemployment rate climbing back over 9% last month and Obama’s approval rating on the economy dipping to 34%—the lowest level of his presidency—American businesses and the public clearly see things differently.

Of course, it’s the voters’ job to pick political winners and losers.  And if these economic trends continue, Obama may find that presidential decrees won’t be enough to save his presidency.

Advertisements
Categories: America, Democrats, Financial Crisis, Money, People, Politics, Unemployed | Tags: , , , , | 1 Comment

Post navigation

One thought on “Obama’s Specious Decree to Business: Hire Workers Already

  1. This a great evolving problem and an evolving technique. It will be years before a consensus is reached and then then I doubt men and women assume will go along. This column is not meant resolve the problem, but you transortation to start thinking about how you value privacy online exactly where there is you place social media on your own continuum.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.