‘Stooges’ on labor board just doing their jobs

To the editor:

Big Labor, according to a Thursday Review-Journal editorial, got its Christmas present when its "stooges" on the National Labor Relations Board approved "ambush organizing elections."

Really?

First, I don't know who this bogeyman, "Big Labor," is, but that isn't really the point since it's just a derogatory term, along with "union bosses" and "stooges," that you use as an attempt to impart your anti-worker perspective to your readers.

The real point is that the NLRB has approved expedited elections for union representation.

The Review-Journal, along with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which represents the corporate bosses of Big Business, believes that this is somehow unfair to employers.

The truth is that employers have a captured audience with their employees, and they can, and do, use their time to preach to their employees the need for their businesses to remain union-free and to pressure them to resist any union organizing efforts. Employer pressure often includes illegal threats and coercion.

Union organizers, on the other hand, must try to reach the employees off premises and during off-work hours to explain the benefits of union representation. Employers have the advantage of time, and reducing that time by a couple of weeks is not likely to make much of a difference.

The NLRB did, however, see this as a minor change that could possibly help to level the playing field by allowing workers to make an informed decision without undue pressure from their employer.

NLRB members are only referred to as "stooges" when they do the job the NLRB was created to do -- protect the rights of American workers to be represented by a union of their choice.

They are never "stooges" in the eyes of the Review-Journal and the U.S Chamber of Commerce when they cripple these rights and serve only in the interest of the corporate bosses of Big Business.

Tom Gillespie

Mesquite

Energy costs

To the editor:

In spite of all the eloquent speakers at the many public hearings, the drastic economic condition of our state, and the unbelievable unemployment rate, the Public Utilities Commission has moved forward and granted a rate hike of 10 percent to NV Energy (Thursday Review-Journal).

I don't know who appoints the members of the PUC, but maybe it's time to try to create a movement to get these people elected, thus making them responsible to the voters and not private industry. Obviously they don't seem to give a damn about the needs or devastating effects these utility bills might have on the public, especially those of low and limited incomes.

R. Goodman

Henderson