Since taking office, President Trump has stacked the National Labor Relations Board with anti-worker members who have put unions and the right of working people to stand together in their crosshairs. Earlier this month, the NLRB filed a lawsuit against the State of Oregon over a 2009 law that limits the type of meetings an employer can make mandatory for workers - such as political or religious topics. A legal strategy to defend this important law is underway because the intent behind the decade-old law is just as poignant today as it was in 2009.
To educate Oregonians about this lawsuit, Oregon AFL-CIO Graham Trainor joined National AFL-CIO Chief Counsel Craig Backer and Alexander Hertel-Fernandez, an associate professor at Columbia University to author a guest opinion, which was recently published by the Pamplin Media Group. The article walks readers through why the 2009 law was created, and how recent political events have put it on the NRLB’s list of protections to attack:
Imagine you receive an email explaining all workers at your company are required to attend a meeting with senior management. You show up expecting a presentation about work, only to find a manager explaining why you should vote for President Donald Trump or else the company might have to lay off workers. When some of your coworkers ask to leave, managers remind them participation is mandatory and anyone who leaves may be fired. Can your boss do that?
In Oregon, thankfully, no. But that could change if the Trump administration gets its way.
Oregon’s Union Movement is committed to defending this important law, and we will continue to dispatch breaking news and ways to help as the issue evolves. You can help spread the word about the lawsuit by sharing this post on social media using the buttons below.
Comments