Abandoning Even the Pretense of Neutrality

The Obama administration has abandoned even the pretense of not being in the tank for its union supporters.

First, it handed took ownership of GM away from secured creditors and gave it to the UAW.

Second was the NLRB over-reach in veto-ing plant relocation decisions by Boeing

More recently came the rules changes for quick, midnight unionization elections to prevent target companies from being able to tell their side of their story

Finally, comes news that the Obama Administration worked to trash pensions of non-unionized auto workers while protecting pensions of union workers.


  1. Colin:

    Not to mention their refusal to pass FTAs with Colombia, South Korea and Panama due to union pressure.

  2. Dave Boz:

    There are a few possible outcomes when those quick midnight unionization votes take place. The one obviously favored by the Obama administration is that the union becomes the voice of the company's workers and negotiates pay and benefits on behalf of the employees. Another possibility (only available to smaller firms) is the quick midnight closure of the company. For larger companies, the probable outcome is a longer-term movement to places less union-friendly, either in the US or in Mexico or in places further afield. Thus the efforts by the administration to make relocation illegal; this effort will in the long run almost certainly fail and will most likely result in more jobs leaving the US for other countries. Consider Toyota, for example: if the company were unionized by the UAW tomorrow, you would see Toyota planning assembly plants in Mexico the day after tomorrow.

    Mr. Obama's philosophy is apparently that you should either have a union job or no job at all, and I don't think he's terribly concerned about those who end up with the latter.

  3. Kyle:

    Yup, that was my father. 33 years at Delphi working 60 hour weeks, traveling extensively, dealing with tremendous stress trying to keep the business afloat despite a severely unproductive and overpaid workforce. So in the end the very people who drove the company into banckruptcy were made whole while the ones who spent a career working diligently to produce quality products and run a profitable business in the face of a hostile workforce are now seeing pensions a third to a half what they were planning on for the last decade of their careers.

  4. Mark:

    And you are surprised? That is why the libertarian claims that the Republicans and Democrats are the "Coke and Pepsi" parties ring so untrue. If you look at campaign rhetoric, sure. But, if you look at practice, it isn't even close.

    The Democrats want to gain government power to use that power to protect their constituent groups. The Republicans may have "constituent groups", but they "protect" those interests by reducing government power, with reduced taxes being the most obvious.

  5. Invid:

    Just keep telling yourself that Mark. I'm trying to remember all that reduction of power that took place with W...and HW.

  6. Mark:

    There are four examples above. Nice try.

  7. caseyboy:

    Democrat support for unions reflects the role unions play in fund raising.

  8. GoneWithTheWind:

    I still do not understand why the creditors and astock owners stood still for it. Where are the law suits???

  9. Stephen Macklin:

    I want to note an error in your language.

    "Second was the NLRB over-reach in veto-ing plant relocation decisions by Boeing."

    Boeing was not relocating production. They were expanding their current production capacity. They did not move any production or jobs from their Washington facility - in fact they increased employment in Washington.

    To say that Boeing is "relocating" production is to use the intentionally misleading language of the unions and the NRLB.