Sundry…

• Three House members from South Carolina took to the House floor Monday to express their opposition to the National Labor Relations Board’s unprecedented complaint against Boeing for locating new production facilities for the 787 Dreamliner in South Carolina instead of unionized Washington State. The remarks by Reps. Trey Gowdy, Jeff Duncan and Mick Mulvaney are available here.

• LaborUnionReport.com theorizes that the NLRB’s actions could eventually work against non-unionized employers, as well. It’s an interesting legal discussion at “Opening Pandora’s Box Beyond Boeing: NLRB’s Attack on Free Enterprise Should Concern All Americans.”

• Richard Trumka, the AFL-CIO president, presented a well-structured, vigorous defense of the NLRB on the Boeing issue in his speech last week at the National Press Club. Trumka said: “While Boeing and the Chamber of Commerce may not like it, the law of the land protects working people who exercise that right against any retaliation by their employers.” And that was it. Reporters did not follow up in the Q&A, showing more interest in football.

• The issue is playing nationally. Rep. Tom Price (R-GA), a strong supporter of manufacturing, raised the NLRB issue in remarks last week at the Marietta Rotary Club. He said: “The National Labor Relations Board has moved in a destructive direction in regards to job creation, not just in favoring unions, but in telling airplane manufacturer Boeing that it was proposing not to all allow it to move a manufacturing facility from Washington, which is pro-union, to South Carolina, which is a right-to-work state, because it would, ‘harm union activities.’ Boeing has determined it works best for them to move part of its manufacturing capability to South Carolina. Think about what that means. Washington power brokers can pick winners and losers.”

Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) led an attempt to defund the National Labor Relations Board in the U.S. House earlier this year, and he continues to vigorously criticize the board following the NLRB’s complaint against Boeing for locating new production facilities in South Carolina. In a statement, Rep. Price says:

The decision by the NLRB to attack a company trying to create American jobs is emblematic of the current administration and its attempts to punish success and pick winners and losers in our economy.  This is an absolutely reckless effort to placate a political ally at a time when we should be encouraging companies to invest and grow.

Gary Shapiro, president and CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association, also identifies political solicitude as the impetus for the NLRB move against the aircraft manufacturer. In a Forbes.com column, “Federal Government Attacks on Boeing Fuel Our National Economic Suicide,” Shapiro writes:

Sometimes by favoring a narrow constituency, the federal government can cause economic devastation for a company or a state and even encourage companies to manufacture outside the United States. In terms of sheer economic stupidity, the Obama Administration committed an economic felony when the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ordered Boeing to shutter a spanking new $2 billion facility that would have created 1,000 much-needed new jobs in South Carolina.

In addition, the letter from nine attorneys general to the NLRB’s acting general counsel calling on him to withdrawn the complaint continues to draw attention.

• Charleston Regional Business, “Attorneys general ask NLRB to withdraw complaint against Boeing“
• Washington Examiner (blog), “Cuccinelli joins Boeing labor fray”
• Sunshine State News, “Defending Boeing, Pam Bondi Stands Up for Right to Work”

It’s not just South Carolina that should worry about its prosperity if the National Labor Relations Board’s extreme move against Boeing is upheld. Any states with heavily unionized industrial sectors will find it more difficult to attract new companies.

The Detroit News makes that important point in its editorial today, “Rein in the NLRB: Newly aggressive federal labor agency’s stances illustrate a hostile attitude toward business”:

If the NLRB complaint is upheld in the courts, it will ultimately damage not only the firms that will then be held hostage to their unions, but all heavily unionized states such as Michigan.

What new firm would invest in Michigan knowing that its union could then block its expansion to a less unionized state such as Tennessee or Alabama? The better course would be to start a new firm in a right-to-work state from the beginning.

This move by the NLRB is part of its new, more aggressive tactics, including suits against Arizona and South Dakota seeking to strike down state constitutional amendments that guarantee workers secret ballots in unionization elections.

The News also calls for action on Capitol Hill.

President Barack Obama has made conciliatory sounds seeking to reassure business, but the actions of the NLRB illustrate the real face of his administration. Congress ought to hold hearings on reining in the NLRB.

In February Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) sponsored an amendment to H.R. 1, the continuing resolution, to defund the NLRB, but it failed 176-250. With the spending bill now law, political leverage against the board declines.