Alan Wilson to NLRB: "Bring it on"


If the National Labor Relations Board expected it's threats to sue over efforts to protect the use of secret ballot in certifying unions in the workplace would force South Carolina and three other states to reverse the outcome of referendum votes from last year, they won't be getting their way.

According to the New York Times, state Attorney General Alan Wilson's office was quick to respond, rebuffing the NLRB threat:

“South Carolina voters spoke overwhelmingly to ensure that their ballot votes are kept between them and their maker — not to be influenced by union bosses. If that right is challenged, our office is prepared to defend it in court.”

The Blogland spoke with Wilson earlier today, who told us his office expected action from Washington and assured us that they would be prepared to meet the NLRB challenge, pointing out "I don't know how you don't defend a sweeping decision made by 86 percent of your state's voters".

A copy of the NLRB letter to Wilson can be found here.

These referendums were initiated in 2010 as a response to legislation which almost passed the United States Senate which would have diminished the right of employees to decide the outcome of efforts to organize unions in their workplace by the use of secret ballot, a time-honored method of voting in the United States.

The NLRB move to seek to invalidate the outcome of these referendums fits into a pattern of aggressive actions that were expected after recent appointments to the Board by the Obama administration.

The next turn will be up the feds, who promised quick action in a letter sent to Wilson's office unless states refused to enforce the referendum outcomes and repudiated those positions.

3 Response to "Alan Wilson to NLRB: "Bring it on""

  1. Anonymous 17/1/11 09:29
    When I consider that the union votes I've been involved in have ranged from a secret ballot on contracts to open voice votes on other business; I'm left to consider that several state AG's would be well positioned to bring an unfair labour practices act or perhaps a voting rights act charge against any organizing activity that attempts or preempts a secret ballot.


    Alas SC, you have unions that are two faced. That nice ILA hall in downtown Charleston, erected on the largesse of the "Charleston Five" donations, ultimately was built by "scab labour"
  2. Norm_Nav 17/1/11 09:48
    Isn't it the NLRB?
  3. earlcapps 17/1/11 10:27
    Norm, you're right. Brain slipped a gear there. Thanks for catching me!

Post a Comment

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts!

To post a comment without having a Blogger account, select "Name/URL", put your name in, but leave the URL line blank. Email me if you'd like to comment, but need help making it work.