(05-22-2024 02:31 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/21/supreme-court-jarkesy-administrative-state-00158948

My first thought upon reading this article was "what effect will this have on the NLRB's attack upon Dartmouth via the Dartmouth basketball team?". A favorable SC ruling here looks like it would render that entire case moot.

At the NLRB, labor-law enforcement has continued, though agency experts say there’s little chance the board could function in its current form if the arguments advanced by SpaceX in its suit against the agency prove persuasive.

“I can’t think of any other agency that relies on adjudication as a sort of policymaking avenue like the NLRB does,” said University of North Carolina law professor Jeffrey Hirsch, a former NLRB attorney.

(05-22-2024 04:43 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 02:31 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/21/supreme-court-jarkesy-administrative-state-00158948

My first thought upon reading this article was "what effect will this have on the NLRB's attack upon Dartmouth via the Dartmouth basketball team?". A favorable SC ruling here looks like it would render that entire case moot.

At the NLRB, labor-law enforcement has continued, though agency experts say there’s little chance the board could function in its current form if the arguments advanced by SpaceX in its suit against the agency prove persuasive.

“I can’t think of any other agency that relies on adjudication as a sort of policymaking avenue like the NLRB does,” said University of North Carolina law professor Jeffrey Hirsch, a former NLRB attorney.

Judges are appointed by elected officials.
Dartmouth University is not being 'attacked' by the NLRB.

Those curious about the origin, mission and structure of the National Labour Relations Board can find information here:

About the NLRB
https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/who-we-are

About the National Labour Relations Act (1935)
https://www.nlrb.gov/guidance/key-reference-materials/national-labor-relations-act

FAQs
https://www.nlrb.gov/resources/faq/nlrb

The NLRB was founded 'to safeguard employees’ rights to organise, engage with one another to seek better working conditions, choose whether or not to have a collective bargaining representative negotiate on their behalf with their employer, or refrain from doing so. The NLRB also acts to prevent and remedy unfair labour practices committed by private sector employers and unions, as well as conducts secret-ballot elections regarding union representation.'

The social contract at work.

(05-22-2024 05:03 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, federal cases should be handled by federal judges, meaning judges appointed by the president with the consent of the senate. Any court that is part of a federal arm that doesn't have that characteristic is illegitimate, IMO.

(05-22-2024 10:44 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 05:03 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, federal cases should be handled by federal judges, meaning judges appointed by the president with the consent of the senate. Any court that is part of a federal arm that doesn't have that characteristic is illegitimate, IMO.

That would wipe out ALJ's in every Department, as well as all U.S. bankruptcy judges, Federal Magistrates nationwide, all Federal judges in U.S. Territories and would accomplish nothing but further clog an already jammed up Federal Court system.

It also ignores Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution:

"Section 8.

The Congress shall have power to ...
To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;
...

(05-22-2024 10:42 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 04:43 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  Judges are appointed by elected officials.
Dartmouth University is not being 'attacked' by the NLRB.

Those curious about the origin, mission and structure of the National Labour Relations Board can find information here:

About the NLRB
https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/who-we-are

About the National Labour Relations Act (1935)
https://www.nlrb.gov/guidance/key-reference-materials/national-labor-relations-act

FAQs
https://www.nlrb.gov/resources/faq/nlrb

The NLRB was founded 'to safeguard employees’ rights to organise, engage with one another to seek better working conditions, choose whether or not to have a collective bargaining representative negotiate on their behalf with their employer, or refrain from doing so. The NLRB also acts to prevent and remedy unfair labour practices committed by private sector employers and unions, as well as conducts secret-ballot elections regarding union representation.'

The social contract at work.

The National Labor Relations Act was "earned" by union members trying to organize and strike to obtain decent wages and working conditions in the late Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries, sometimes battling Pinkertons, scabs and private company "cops" like the Coal And Iron Police in the process.

(05-22-2024 10:44 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 05:03 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, federal cases should be handled by federal judges, meaning judges appointed by the president with the consent of the senate. Any court that is part of a federal arm that doesn't have that characteristic is illegitimate, IMO.

That would wipe out ALJ's in every Department, as well as all U.S. bankruptcy judges, Federal Magistrates nationwide, all Federal judges in U.S. Territories and would accomplish nothing but further clog an already jammed up Federal Court system.

It also ignores Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution:

"Section 8.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

(05-22-2024 10:42 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 04:43 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 02:31 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/21/supreme-court-jarkesy-administrative-state-00158948

My first thought upon reading this article was "what effect will this have on the NLRB's attack upon Dartmouth via the Dartmouth basketball team?". A favorable SC ruling here looks like it would render that entire case moot.

At the NLRB, labor-law enforcement has continued, though agency experts say there’s little chance the board could function in its current form if the arguments advanced by SpaceX in its suit against the agency prove persuasive.

“I can’t think of any other agency that relies on adjudication as a sort of policymaking avenue like the NLRB does,” said University of North Carolina law professor Jeffrey Hirsch, a former NLRB attorney.

Judges are appointed by elected officials.
Dartmouth University is not being 'attacked' by the NLRB.

Those curious about the origin, mission and structure of the National Labour Relations Board can find information here:

About the NLRB
https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/who-we-are

About the National Labour Relations Act (1935)
https://www.nlrb.gov/guidance/key-reference-materials/national-labor-relations-act

FAQs
https://www.nlrb.gov/resources/faq/nlrb

The NLRB was founded 'to safeguard employees’ rights to organise, engage with one another to seek better working conditions, choose whether or not to have a collective bargaining representative negotiate on their behalf with their employer, or refrain from doing so. The NLRB also acts to prevent and remedy unfair labour practices committed by private sector employers and unions, as well as conducts secret-ballot elections regarding union representation.'

The social contract at work.

The National Labor Relations Act was "earned" by union members trying to organize and strike to obtain decent wages and working conditions in the late Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries, sometimes battling Pinkertons, scabs and private company "cops" like the Coal And Iron Police in the process.

(05-22-2024 11:08 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 10:42 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 04:43 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  Judges are appointed by elected officials.
Dartmouth University is not being 'attacked' by the NLRB.

Those curious about the origin, mission and structure of the National Labour Relations Board can find information here:

About the NLRB
https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/who-we-are

About the National Labour Relations Act (1935)
https://www.nlrb.gov/guidance/key-reference-materials/national-labor-relations-act

FAQs
https://www.nlrb.gov/resources/faq/nlrb

The NLRB was founded 'to safeguard employees’ rights to organise, engage with one another to seek better working conditions, choose whether or not to have a collective bargaining representative negotiate on their behalf with their employer, or refrain from doing so. The NLRB also acts to prevent and remedy unfair labour practices committed by private sector employers and unions, as well as conducts secret-ballot elections regarding union representation.'

The social contract at work.

The National Labor Relations Act was "earned" by union members trying to organize and strike to obtain decent wages and working conditions in the late Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries, sometimes battling Pinkertons, scabs and private company "cops" like the Coal And Iron Police in the process.

Productive people were obliged to earn recognition of rights they held. Indeed. Absolutely.

The great strength of open societies is their capacity for self-correction. That's the secret of their resilience. The public benefits from dialogue that allows power of numbers to act as a counterweight to power of position. The dialogue brings about disability benefits, child labour laws, safe workplaces, living wages... revenue sharing with students who risk injury while wearing the school colours.

Karl Marx's big mistake, many say, lay in underestimating the ability of an open society to reform itself. He took it for granted that violent revolution would be necessary to achieve the kind of change that open societies have shown they can achieve peacefully... when neighbours cherish that peace, and listen to each other, and adjust. Together, they create the community they really want.

(05-22-2024 10:44 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 05:03 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, federal cases should be handled by federal judges, meaning judges appointed by the president with the consent of the senate. Any court that is part of a federal arm that doesn't have that characteristic is illegitimate, IMO.

That would wipe out ALJ's in every Department, as well as all U.S. bankruptcy judges, Federal Magistrates nationwide, all Federal judges in U.S. Territories and would accomplish nothing but further clog an already jammed up Federal Court system.

It also ignores Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution:

"Section 8.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

(05-23-2024 02:12 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  My 16 year old kid starting work today at McDonalds lives better than the various Kings and Queens of England did 100 years ago. Does she need a Texas Fast Food Worker's Union to represent her interests? Unions, like most other very large organizations with enormous amounts of money at stake, have suffered enormous mission creep over the past century ++, to the point that their aims today would be almost unrecognizable to their founders.

Can you imagine Samuel Gompers striking to get an extra 3 sick days on top of the already 35 hour work week and 100k avg wage at a Ford Plant? I mean, maybe he would have, but the Wrench Jockeys today aren't "battling Pinkertons and Coal and Iron Police" while on strike. They're instead frustrated that they can't play golf an extra 3 times a year b/c the union negotiators aren't good enough.

The NLRB has arbitrarily decided over a very long period of time that they should have more and more and more of a say in various aspects of Corporate America. I, for one, would be quite pleased to see their wings clipped, and they'd still be able to actually do the job they were created to do without all the Administrative Law Judges.

(05-23-2024 03:03 PM)LeeNobody Wrote:  I for one am supportive of an active and fair referee for labor disputes. If the government exists to support the best interests of it's citizens, it cannot stand on the sidelines when exploitative actions are being taken by monopolies or monopsonies. Both labor and business can use coercion to influence outcomes of a labor struggles. When the government didn't act people were killed. Everyone rails against bureaucracy but are ignorant that the counterpoint they are fighting for existed. Nobody was a fan of the coal wars, or the boxcar riots. The NLRB gives an alternate to violence.

(05-23-2024 02:12 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  My 16 year old kid starting work today at McDonalds lives better than the various Kings and Queens of England did 100 years ago. Does she need a Texas Fast Food Worker's Union to represent her interests?
....

(05-23-2024 03:13 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-23-2024 03:03 PM)LeeNobody Wrote:  I for one am supportive of an active and fair referee for labor disputes. If the government exists to support the best interests of it's citizens, it cannot stand on the sidelines when exploitative actions are being taken by monopolies or monopsonies. Both labor and business can use coercion to influence outcomes of a labor struggles. When the government didn't act people were killed. Everyone rails against bureaucracy but are ignorant that the counterpoint they are fighting for existed. Nobody was a fan of the coal wars, or the boxcar riots. The NLRB gives an alternate to violence.

I agree, 100%. However, there's nothing in there that dictates that said agency should stir up trouble where none previously existed, as at Dartmouth. That's not acting as a "fair referee", that's picking, or attempting to pick winners.

(05-23-2024 02:29 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 10:44 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 05:03 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, federal cases should be handled by federal judges, meaning judges appointed by the president with the consent of the senate. Any court that is part of a federal arm that doesn't have that characteristic is illegitimate, IMO.

That would wipe out ALJ's in every Department, as well as all U.S. bankruptcy judges, Federal Magistrates nationwide, all Federal judges in U.S. Territories and would accomplish nothing but further clog an already jammed up Federal Court system.

It also ignores Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution:

"Section 8.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

But these ALJs were not created by Congress, they were created by unelected Bureaucrats.

(05-22-2024 02:31 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/21/supreme-court-jarkesy-administrative-state-00158948

My first thought upon reading this article was "what effect will this have on the NLRB's attack upon Dartmouth via the Dartmouth basketball team?". A favorable SC ruling here looks like it would render that entire case moot.

At the NLRB, labor-law enforcement has continued, though agency experts say there’s little chance the board could function in its current form if the arguments advanced by SpaceX in its suit against the agency prove persuasive.

“I can’t think of any other agency that relies on adjudication as a sort of policymaking avenue like the NLRB does,” said University of North Carolina law professor Jeffrey Hirsch, a former NLRB attorney.

(05-23-2024 02:24 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 11:08 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 10:42 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-22-2024 04:43 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  Judges are appointed by elected officials.
Dartmouth University is not being 'attacked' by the NLRB.

Those curious about the origin, mission and structure of the National Labour Relations Board can find information here:

About the NLRB
https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/who-we-are

About the National Labour Relations Act (1935)
https://www.nlrb.gov/guidance/key-reference-materials/national-labor-relations-act

FAQs
https://www.nlrb.gov/resources/faq/nlrb

The NLRB was founded 'to safeguard employees’ rights to organise, engage with one another to seek better working conditions, choose whether or not to have a collective bargaining representative negotiate on their behalf with their employer, or refrain from doing so. The NLRB also acts to prevent and remedy unfair labour practices committed by private sector employers and unions, as well as conducts secret-ballot elections regarding union representation.'

The social contract at work.

The National Labor Relations Act was "earned" by union members trying to organize and strike to obtain decent wages and working conditions in the late Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries, sometimes battling Pinkertons, scabs and private company "cops" like the Coal And Iron Police in the process.

Productive people were obliged to earn recognition of rights they held. Indeed. Absolutely.

The great strength of open societies is their capacity for self-correction. That's the secret of their resilience. The public benefits from dialogue that allows power of numbers to act as a counterweight to power of position. The dialogue brings about disability benefits, child labour laws, safe workplaces, living wages... revenue sharing with students who risk injury while wearing the school colours.

Karl Marx's big mistake, many say, lay in underestimating the ability of an open society to reform itself. He took it for granted that violent revolution would be necessary to achieve the kind of change that open societies have shown they can achieve peacefully... when neighbours cherish that peace, and listen to each other, and adjust. Together, they create the community they really want.

You should be happy that Karl Marx didn't write the laws in the US, else there would be nowhere for FSU to run to get away from the ACC at all. We'd all be making peanuts.

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. - Margaret Thatcher

Sure, in an ideal society with no want, everybody cared for completely, and nothing to strive for or conquer, Marx's ideal of a Utopian society could be achieved. But even in that case, I'd ask what happens to the march of progress? We'd stagnate and wither away. So, even if Marx's ideal society could ever be achieved, it would not be stable b/c it would have no Meaning. Instead what we see today, and what we've seen for a Century, is Autocrats twisting his words towards their own Evil ends, and Republics shunning his ideas b/c we recognize that it is in fact possible to run out of other people's money.