Dana Corp misrepresented

My students and readers of this blog know my support for Dana Corp's approach to ensure that employees' right to select union representation by a majority vote is protected against abuse when a union seeks to establish majority support by card check which would support voluntary recognition of the union by an employer. This poster gets the import of the case correct. However, the representation that undoing Dana Corp is a novel way to impose EFCA-esque card check recognition is at best erroneous, and perhaps pure political posturing, as is other political comentary in the post. Undoing Dana Corp would return the law of voluntary recognition to its decades long, stable procedures which existed before the Bush majority NLRB decided Dana Corp in 2007. We do not see this as positive change because it diminishes a protection for workers (much as we believe card check recognition in EFCA would do), but it is not a radical departure form pre-2007 Board law. More background on Dana Corp's effect here.

NLRA politics 101

I have to chuckle when I see posts like this complaining that the NLRB is political. Its designed that way, and pretty much has been institutionally an entity which furthers the interests of unions and unionization. It's that way because the NLRA is that way. One need only read the Section 1 "Findings and Policies" 29 U.S.C. § 151.