Politics, economics, big labor, and free-markets have been the source of endless debate. Still, it seems when we move towards protectionism, unions, socialism, or to attempt to modify the flows of commerce, we always lose in the end, and that stands true today more than ever. Lets talk.
There was an interesting article in Forbes which was a telling sign of some of the challenges we have in the US between regulators and business. The article was titled “Rules Would Speed Up Union Elections” by Sam Hanenel (also found in the Associated Press) on June 21, 2011. The article indicated:
“Labor regulators are proposing sweeping new rules that would dramatically speed up the time frame for union elections, a move that could make it easier for struggling unions to organize new members, and cut the time businesses have to mount anti-union campaigns. The National Labor Relations Board or NLRB announced the new rules saying the current rules build in unnecessary delays and encourage wasteful litigation.”
Right so, what the Labor Side is saying is that these new rules will reduce their need to defend lawsuits from corporations which have been wronged, and make it easy for them to do more, faster by changing the law in their favor. How does this help free-enterprise I ask? Well, obviously it doesnt and such rules and regulatory changes will only accelerate the off-shoring of jobs and outsourcing of factories I fear. But it will be great for unions which have a long-term strangle-hold on certain industries and certain companies.
The concept of electronic filing of petitions, documents, and forms for union formation will speed up the process, but speeding up the process will cause the company to be caught flat-footed, and it will disrupt the supply chain. It is also know that unions purposely target companies for unionization when they have secured contracts and become key components of the supply chain.
Indeed, after a company bids the job very cheap using their sharpest pencil, then the union swoops in to “take” all the profits via extortion tactics and threats, so it is rather interesting that the government sides with labor in this regard. Another problematic clause in this new rule would be to; “reduce from 7 to 2 days the time for an employer to provide an electronic list of eligible voters,” so the employer which is under labor tightening, has to drop everything it is doing and determine who is eligible and get back to a union which has nothing to do with the company at all within 2-days?
It used to be a week, but it ought to be never. Why should a company have to give information to a union which plans on coming in using extortion tactics and threaten its quarterly profits, shareholders equity, and even its future viability? It shouldnt. And 2-days, well thats pretty unfair especially for a company that may have been in business for 5-years, and doing just fine without a union.
Basically, all the union has to do is wait until there is a little problem, or something in the media provides a foot-hold in the door, and they are allowed to run-in, break down the door, and demand immediate action so they can ruin long-standing viable companies representing Americas industrial base? No wonder so many companies are off-shoring and outsourcing, I dont blame them, Id leave too. Please consider all this.
Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank. Lance Winslow believes writing 23,850 articles by July 4, 2011 is going to be difficult because all the letters on his keyboard are now worn off now.
