Reps. John Kline (R-MN) and John Mica (R-FL) today strongly criticized a proposal by the National Mediation Board to alter workplace organizing elections in the aviation and railway industries, questioning the limited review process for developing the new policy and an apparent attempt to limit public opposition. The Board’s split decision was announced via a proposal in the Federal Register yesterday, despite the lack of a comprehensive hearing process on related issues. Kline and Mica are the top Republicans on the committees that oversee labor and transportation policy, respectively, in the U.S. House of Representatives.
“The proposal to rapidly and radically alter rail and aviation organizing rules at the behest of organized labor adds to a troubling perception that federal agencies have embraced a culture of union favoritism,” said Kline. “Whether it’s scaling back union reporting on how rank-and-file workers’ dues are spent or supporting a plan to set aside the secret ballot in the workplace, these decisions are putting special interests ahead of workers’ interests.”
“With labor’s new political clout it appears the Board has yielded to now suddenly propose a dramatic change in long-standing union election procedures to allow a clear minority of workers to force unionization upon all workers, including those who are not interested in being represented by a union,” Mica said.
Last year when the Board proposed changes to their election rules during the Delta/Northwest Airlines merger, Transportation Committee Chairman Oberstar, as well as Board Member Harry Hoglander, expressed concern with the timing of the proposed changes and the perception that the Board was seen to favor Delta Airlines. At the time, Member Hoglander stated in a letter to the TTD that “…this ill advised action will only strengthen the perception of bias and sow distrust and suspicion.” Mica added, “The Board’s actions yesterday only serve to strengthen the perception of bias towards organized labor and further sow distrust and suspicion.”
Kline and Mica received a letter yesterday from Elizabeth Dougherty, the Board’s Chairman, detailing a coordinated effort by the panel’s other two members to prevent her from publicly dissenting from the proposal, which allows union certification even if a majority of workers do not vote for it. Dougherty also questioned the haste of the process by which the decision was reached, raising concerns about consequences for a number of elections pending before the Board.
“I also query – why the rush to publish the proposed rule? The election rule in question has been in place for 75 years; why not wait one more day in the interest of ensuring a fair rulemaking process and accommodating the reasonable request of a colleague. Such an obvious rush to put out a proposed rule gives the impression that the Board has prejudged this issue, and it will contribute to the growing perception that the majority is attempting to push through a controversial election rule change to influence the outcome of several very large and important representation cases currently pending at the Board,” Dougherty wrote.
Last month, Kline and Mica wrote to the Board opposing the policy shift that was formally proposed yesterday. Initiated by the Transportation and Trades Department of the AFL-CIO, the new policy would require airline and rail workers to be certified as having formed a union upon the vote of a majority of only those workers participating in an election, rather than requiring a majority vote among all workers.
“Under current rules, if an airline has 4,000 nonunion employees, 2,001 must vote yes to unionize. Under the union proposal if only 1,000 of 4,000 vote, and 501 vote yes, all 4,000 become subject to unionization,” Kline and Mica wrote to the Board. “This is clearly a drastic and fundamental change to long-standing rules under the Railway Labor Act, rules tied to important national policies recognizing the importance of air transportation to commerce and the need for union representation that has majority support.”
# # #
