As we've made clear in our Workers Rights Watch: Eye on the NLRB series, a number of recent decisions from the National Labor Relations Board have restricted the rights of workers struggling to form unions. What we haven't mentioned before is that the Board has narrowed legal protections for the majority of Americans who are not represented by a union, but who need to turn to co-workers for 'mutual aid and protection' when they fear employer reprisal.  A case involving a non-union Wal-Mart employee makes evident how labor law impedes rather than protects these workers' rights.

When a small group of engineers asked for union recognition, their employer responded with retaliation so severe—including threats of job loss, unlawful surveillance, and the firing of their co-worker—that it was no wonder they voted against forming a union when the election was eventually held.  Unfortunately, the engineers had to wait for two years for a judge to find the employer guilty.  And while the judge threw out the results of the election and ordered the employer to recognize the union and bargain with the engineers, the ruling was immediately appealed by the employer.  The ultimate insult for the engineers, however, was the National Labor Relations Board's recent decision to overturn the judge’s ruling. The Bush-appointed NLRB members decided that the best solution to an employer seriously threatening and intimidating employees was… another election.

This summer, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) told hard-working graduate research and teaching assistants that they were not workers, and therefore denied them the right to organize and collectively bargain.  Workers' rights took another step backwards when the NLRB recently decided that disabled employees who receive rehabilitative services from their employer are not workers, and are therefore ineligible to form a union under the protections of federal law.  This ruling is not only a major setback for disabled Americans and their efforts to fully integrate into the workforce and society, but represents another move by the NLRB to shrink federal protections of worker rights. 

North Carolina meatpackers have endured grisly working conditions, unfair pay, and a decade of attacks on their right to organize.  So why has the NLRB failed to rule on their case for four years?   

When employees collectively decide that they no longer wish to be represented by a union, they have the ability under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) to vote to revoke union representation at their workplace.  This process, known as a decertification, is expressly intended for workers to initiate, not employers.  While it is illegal for employers to orchestrate a decertification election to rid employees of their union, they can use their position of power to break the law with little fear of the consequences. 

Workers at Pearson Educational, Inc. in Indianapolis have been in limbo since they voted for union representation six years ago.  It all started in June of 1998, when a majority of warehouse and distribution workers chose union representation.  Instead of accepting the results of the election and negotiating wages, benefits, and working conditions with its employees, the company chose to appeal, resulting in a delay that stalled bargaining for years.  On July 6, 2004, the appeals process was exhausted, the result of the election was confirmed, and the company was finally ordered to bargain six years after the workers voted for union representation.

What would prevent a corporation from lying to shareholders about profits if its only punishment was to promise it wouldn't lie again?  Sadly, when a company violates labor law, often the company's only punishment is to post a notice promising not to break the law again.  With remedies like this, there is little to deter employers from violating labor law.  In May 2004, the NLRB ordered just such a remedy, and if anything, it sent a message to nurses in Albany, NY, that the law does little to protect their rights. 

On September 18, 2003, workers at New York Display & Die Cutting Corp. cast ballots to decide on union representation.  Yet even with just 26 ballots cast, it wasn’t until June 3, 2004—more than eight months after the election—that the results were announced. The workers at the sign and display production company expected and deserved a swift resolution, but were instead forced to hold their breath awaiting the election outcome.