Did you know that unions such as the SEIU have been accompanying OSHA agents on inspections of non-union businesses? In 2013, the agency "clarified" a rule buried deep within its sludge of arcane provisions that allows third parties to make the rounds of a worksite with an OSHA person.
Where the hell did the reasoning behind this come from? The damn union has no connection to the situation. Wouldn't "get the hell off this company's property" trump any kind of regulation like this?
Sure it smells funny, with only about 94 percent of the private sector not unionized, but I think you will find that employees have always had the right to legal counsel during an OSHA investigation (even the employer's legal counsel if it is offered and they agree to it), so this 2013 clarification expands the options available to the employee. Of course the employer can insist on a search warrant and/or court order before allowing an inspection which will likely be a mere matter of a delay while this is obtained. I would think that an employer could initiate litigation against OSHA in an effort to have a judge clarify this opinion of OSHA Deputy Assistant Secretary Richard Fairfax who stated in a letter, dated Feb. 21, 2013, that OSHA allows workers at establishments without collective bargaining agreements to designate who will act on their behalf during inspections. OSHA also released an interpretation letter April 5, This was all in response to a request from Steve Sallman, a health and safety specialist with the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, who inquired whether workers at a nonunionized workplace could authorize a person affiliated with a union to act as their representative under the Occupational Safety and Health Act.
ReplyDeleteIt may not make much common sense, but it makes legal sense. Administrative opinions of cabinet level administrative bodies can be challenged, can't they? Like with a lot of everything else in our nation of laws, not men, see you in court.
Read more at http://www.sbcmag.info/news/2013/may/unions-invited-osha-inspections
Having a lawyer present is a hell of a lot different from having a damn union thug there.
ReplyDeleteI hope this is challenged massively.
Man, that's a mouthful: The United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union. Try to say that right the first 50 times you speak it, lol. Might take a erudite counsel just to say it. Wonder what it sounds like if you hold your tongue while speaking?
ReplyDeleteOSHA can fine employees too and put them through a legal wringer I think. That's why they need representation and it might be reasonable to assume that there are union lawyers out there that specialize in this sort of thing. Not defending unions at all, but I have to defend a system that is legally in place for at least this go-round. Only 7 % of the private sector is unionized these days. It appears that they are almost extinct. Plenty of union sheep out there retiring young from public sector positions, you might chance to envy them someday as you observe their conspicuous retirement consumption. This includes fire and police personnel, public school teachers, administrators, civil service workers and the like. The money has to come from somewhere, right? Yep, our wallets, all of us, unionized or not. Of course you will say none but the cops and fire persons are potentially deserving. As they say, never piss off the cook & the barber, but may as well throw in the cops & firefighters too.
ReplyDeleteThe interesting thing is that, in a theoretical sense, the labor union is a free market concept. The employees democratically decide on a collective position on wages, or working conditions, and say to management, "Here is the basis on which we are willing to trade hours of our labor for your pay." Where that model departs from the free market is situations such as prevailing wage, or beating up scabs. Management says, "Well, what you're insisting on is way above what the market actually bears. There are people right here in our local area willing to take these jobs for x percent less." At that point a union, according to the free-market model, must say, "Well, then, hire them." If it goes intimidating / prohibiting those applicants with more modest expectations, it has crossed the line.
ReplyDelete