SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
If Trump's nominees are confirmed by the Senate, Republicans will control the NLRB for the first time in nearly a decade. (Photo: AFSCME/Twitter)
With Nation's Attention Elsewhere, Trump Quietly Intensifies War on Workers
Trump has nominated two corporate lawyers to the NLRB as Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch gears up to rule on a key labor case
Jun 28, 2017
In a little-discussed move that could spell disaster for unions and workers in the near future and over the long-term, President Donald Trump on Tuesday night announced the nomination of William Emanuel--a lawyer for a firm that represents large corporations--to fill a vacant seat on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
"The labor board put in place by Trump will be far more likely to side with employers in contentious, policy-setting cases."
--Dave Jamieson, Huffington Post
Emanuel, as Reuters noted, is a member of the Federalist Society, an ultra-right-wing group of lawyers and donors that has been credited with producing the list of possible Supreme Court nominees the Trump administration flaunted during his presidential campaign.
If Emanuel and Trump's other nominee--Washington attorney Marvin Kaplan--are confirmed by the Senate, Republicans will control the NLRB for the first time in nearly a decade.
Since November, Republicans at the state level have been passing anti-union laws at a torrid pace, and leverage over federal employment rules will further enable them to dismantle what is left of organized labor.
As such, Republican lawmakers and business groups promptly celebrated Trump's decision to nominate Emanuel, which Huffington Post labor reporter Dave Jamieson characterized as "a big favor for employers, including his family business."
The NLRB's decisions help determine how easy or difficult it is for workers to unionize--which, in turn, affects unions' footprint in the U.S. economy, and how much bargaining power rank-and-file workers have with their employers.
That includes Trump's own family hotel business, which has come before the NLRB several times over labor disputes.
After years of rulings friendly to unions in the Obama era, the labor board put in place by Trump will be far more likely to side with employers in contentious, policy-setting cases. With its new Republican majority, the board may undo notable decisions in recent years that helped more workers secure collective bargaining rights in the workplace.
The prospect that corporate lawyers could soon have the ability to determine the fate of unions has alarmed organizers, who fear that the further deterioration of union influence in the workplace could have devastating effects on worker pay and benefits.
A New York Times list of Obama-era rulings that will likely be overturned by a GOP-controlled NLRB shows that their concerns are justified.
The Times list includes:
- "A ruling that made it easier for relatively small groups of workers within a company to form a union."
- "A ruling that granted graduate students at private universities a federally protected right to unionize."
- "A ruling that increased the likelihood that companies could be held responsible for labor violations committed by contractors and franchisees."
Recent moves by the Trump administration indicate that the Obama administration's overtime rule could soon be on the chopping block as well. The rule, NPR summarized, "said anyone making less than $47,476 a year would be eligible for time-and-a-half pay for hours worked beyond a 40-hour work week."
In addition to the NLRB and Trump-appointed Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta, corporate America also appears to have an ally in new Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, argues Ian Millhiser in a recent piece for The Nation.
Last year, Millhiser notes, "a case that sought to starve public sector unions of the money they need to operate" faltered only after the death of Antonin Scalia created a 4-4 deadlock.
"Now, however, Gorsuch occupies Scalia's old seat," Millhiser wrote. "And Gorsuch is, if anything, well to Scalia's right. The Supreme Court's war on unions, in other words, will now resume."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
In a little-discussed move that could spell disaster for unions and workers in the near future and over the long-term, President Donald Trump on Tuesday night announced the nomination of William Emanuel--a lawyer for a firm that represents large corporations--to fill a vacant seat on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
"The labor board put in place by Trump will be far more likely to side with employers in contentious, policy-setting cases."
--Dave Jamieson, Huffington Post
Emanuel, as Reuters noted, is a member of the Federalist Society, an ultra-right-wing group of lawyers and donors that has been credited with producing the list of possible Supreme Court nominees the Trump administration flaunted during his presidential campaign.
If Emanuel and Trump's other nominee--Washington attorney Marvin Kaplan--are confirmed by the Senate, Republicans will control the NLRB for the first time in nearly a decade.
Since November, Republicans at the state level have been passing anti-union laws at a torrid pace, and leverage over federal employment rules will further enable them to dismantle what is left of organized labor.
As such, Republican lawmakers and business groups promptly celebrated Trump's decision to nominate Emanuel, which Huffington Post labor reporter Dave Jamieson characterized as "a big favor for employers, including his family business."
The NLRB's decisions help determine how easy or difficult it is for workers to unionize--which, in turn, affects unions' footprint in the U.S. economy, and how much bargaining power rank-and-file workers have with their employers.
That includes Trump's own family hotel business, which has come before the NLRB several times over labor disputes.
After years of rulings friendly to unions in the Obama era, the labor board put in place by Trump will be far more likely to side with employers in contentious, policy-setting cases. With its new Republican majority, the board may undo notable decisions in recent years that helped more workers secure collective bargaining rights in the workplace.
The prospect that corporate lawyers could soon have the ability to determine the fate of unions has alarmed organizers, who fear that the further deterioration of union influence in the workplace could have devastating effects on worker pay and benefits.
A New York Times list of Obama-era rulings that will likely be overturned by a GOP-controlled NLRB shows that their concerns are justified.
The Times list includes:
- "A ruling that made it easier for relatively small groups of workers within a company to form a union."
- "A ruling that granted graduate students at private universities a federally protected right to unionize."
- "A ruling that increased the likelihood that companies could be held responsible for labor violations committed by contractors and franchisees."
Recent moves by the Trump administration indicate that the Obama administration's overtime rule could soon be on the chopping block as well. The rule, NPR summarized, "said anyone making less than $47,476 a year would be eligible for time-and-a-half pay for hours worked beyond a 40-hour work week."
In addition to the NLRB and Trump-appointed Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta, corporate America also appears to have an ally in new Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, argues Ian Millhiser in a recent piece for The Nation.
Last year, Millhiser notes, "a case that sought to starve public sector unions of the money they need to operate" faltered only after the death of Antonin Scalia created a 4-4 deadlock.
"Now, however, Gorsuch occupies Scalia's old seat," Millhiser wrote. "And Gorsuch is, if anything, well to Scalia's right. The Supreme Court's war on unions, in other words, will now resume."
In a little-discussed move that could spell disaster for unions and workers in the near future and over the long-term, President Donald Trump on Tuesday night announced the nomination of William Emanuel--a lawyer for a firm that represents large corporations--to fill a vacant seat on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
"The labor board put in place by Trump will be far more likely to side with employers in contentious, policy-setting cases."
--Dave Jamieson, Huffington Post
Emanuel, as Reuters noted, is a member of the Federalist Society, an ultra-right-wing group of lawyers and donors that has been credited with producing the list of possible Supreme Court nominees the Trump administration flaunted during his presidential campaign.
If Emanuel and Trump's other nominee--Washington attorney Marvin Kaplan--are confirmed by the Senate, Republicans will control the NLRB for the first time in nearly a decade.
Since November, Republicans at the state level have been passing anti-union laws at a torrid pace, and leverage over federal employment rules will further enable them to dismantle what is left of organized labor.
As such, Republican lawmakers and business groups promptly celebrated Trump's decision to nominate Emanuel, which Huffington Post labor reporter Dave Jamieson characterized as "a big favor for employers, including his family business."
The NLRB's decisions help determine how easy or difficult it is for workers to unionize--which, in turn, affects unions' footprint in the U.S. economy, and how much bargaining power rank-and-file workers have with their employers.
That includes Trump's own family hotel business, which has come before the NLRB several times over labor disputes.
After years of rulings friendly to unions in the Obama era, the labor board put in place by Trump will be far more likely to side with employers in contentious, policy-setting cases. With its new Republican majority, the board may undo notable decisions in recent years that helped more workers secure collective bargaining rights in the workplace.
The prospect that corporate lawyers could soon have the ability to determine the fate of unions has alarmed organizers, who fear that the further deterioration of union influence in the workplace could have devastating effects on worker pay and benefits.
A New York Times list of Obama-era rulings that will likely be overturned by a GOP-controlled NLRB shows that their concerns are justified.
The Times list includes:
- "A ruling that made it easier for relatively small groups of workers within a company to form a union."
- "A ruling that granted graduate students at private universities a federally protected right to unionize."
- "A ruling that increased the likelihood that companies could be held responsible for labor violations committed by contractors and franchisees."
Recent moves by the Trump administration indicate that the Obama administration's overtime rule could soon be on the chopping block as well. The rule, NPR summarized, "said anyone making less than $47,476 a year would be eligible for time-and-a-half pay for hours worked beyond a 40-hour work week."
In addition to the NLRB and Trump-appointed Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta, corporate America also appears to have an ally in new Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, argues Ian Millhiser in a recent piece for The Nation.
Last year, Millhiser notes, "a case that sought to starve public sector unions of the money they need to operate" faltered only after the death of Antonin Scalia created a 4-4 deadlock.
"Now, however, Gorsuch occupies Scalia's old seat," Millhiser wrote. "And Gorsuch is, if anything, well to Scalia's right. The Supreme Court's war on unions, in other words, will now resume."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.