NLRB Decision Affecting 8 Million Workers Could Happen Any Day

by James Parks, Sep 25, 2006

The definition of one word—”supervisor”—could determine for years to come whether the basic rights of America’s workers are protected.

As early as this week, the Bush-appointed National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is set to decide a trio of cases known as “Kentucky River.” If the NLRB expands the definition of supervisor, that move could take away contract protections from hundreds of thousands of workers represented by unions and deny as many as 8 million workers their freedom to form unions. Federal labor law does not give supervisors the right to join unions or engage in collective bargaining.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) says the decisions could “very well change the basic rights of American workers.” Yet DeLauro points out that such a monumental decision could be made without the groundwork needed by the nation’s labor board.

Given the stakes, the NLRB needs to be as thorough as possible in hearing testimony. The fact that the NLRB has not held hearings shows that the board is not taking this case as seriously as it should. At the heart of the issue is the right of workers to organize, to bargain collectively and to share in decisions.

DeLauro spoke at a Sept. 22 conference sponsored by the Center for American Progress (CAP) Action Fund on the possible impact of the Kentucky River cases.

If the NLRB expands the legal definition of supervisor, DeLauro says she expects congressional Democrats would give “some kind of thought to what legislative remedies are available,” but would not specify any except possibly limiting funds to the NLRB to enforce the ruling.

One of 10 workers—843,000—who could lose their freedom to form a union are registered nurses, says Cheryl Johnson, RN, president of the United American Nurses.

I’m a registered nurse. I take care of patients. I’m very good at it. I make decisions every day, and I give a few orders from time to time whether I’m assigned as charge nurse or not. I am a key leader on the health care team. But I’m not a supervisor.

Today, we have a Labor Board that makes its bread and butter out of determining who should get the privilege of exercising their democratic rights. When did this become a privilege granted only to a few?

Nearly every profession potentially could be affected by the NLRB decision says Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the Economic Policy Institute (EPI). Speaking at the conference, Eisenbrey cited the example of a dockworker with more job experience who tells a less experienced worker how to load a truck. In doing so, the dockworker would be considered a supervisor. Similarly, a baggage handler who explains baggage handling to new staff, and so on.

The economic consequences of the wrong decision could be great, Eisenbrey says. With the median wage dropping over the past five years, to deny union membership to 8 million workers would simply drive down wages even more and increase the growing inequality in our nation.

Sarah Fox, a former member of the NLRB, agrees the ruling also could cause people to lose their jobs. Under the law, supervisors can be fired for supporting a union and can be directed to deliver anti-union messages to workers. If union members lose their protections, they may have to decide whether to follow their consciences or lose their jobs, she says.

During the week of July 10, tens of thousands of union members took to the streets in a week of action to demand that the NLRB not take away their freedom to join a union and that employers not fire them for their union membership.

A decision to broaden the definition of supervisor would nullify more than 50 years of labor law precedent, says former NLRB General Counsel Fred Feinstein. No matter how the board decides, though, the bottom line is that the battle will continue for years and probably will end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

But for Fox, the issue finally comes down to one of values:

Do we want a society where there is so much inequality and stratification? Or do we want a nation we all are working towards where we have a strong middle class and where all people can take part?

Print This Article | E-Mail This Article |Comments (2)