Blog

This week, President Biden schooled U.S. college students protesting the war in Gaza on the difference between exercising their Constitutional rights and engaging in mob violence and vandalism.

The campus clashes, he said, test two “fundamental American principles”:

“The first is the right to free speech and for people to peacefully assemble and make their voices heard. The second is the rule of law. Both must be upheld.”

He was dead right, of course, and likely spoke for millions of Americans appalled both by what’s happening in Gaza and the campus intifada.

But while he’s on the subject of free speech, the president also may want to have a word with federal bureaucrats on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Brian Gee, an NLRB administrative law judge, ruled this week that Amazon CEO Andy Jassy violated federal labor laws by talking with company employees about his view of the downsides of a 2022 union drive.

Of course, more often than not, employers and workers disagree about the merits of unionization. There’s no law against managers talking to workers about their reasons for opposing a union, just as workers have the right to organize one and make a public case for it.

Nor does the Constitution make any exception for business executives in guaranteeing the free speech rights of all U.S. citizens. Gee’s decision maneuvers disingenuously around these inconvenient obstacles by claiming that Jassy’s arguments threatened workers.

“I find that Jassy’s comments threatened employees that, if they selected a union, they would become less empowered and would find it harder to get things done quickly,” Gee wrote in his ruling. “Jassy’s comments that employees would be better off without a union were accompanied by his coercive predictions about the effects of unionization.”

Not exactly bloodcurdling stuff! But don’t take my word for it. Read Jassy’s actual words here and see if you can discern any actual threats.

Union-busting executives who threaten to fire or demote or transfer or otherwise harm workers involved in organizing drives should be prosecuted to the full extent of the many pertinent laws.

By Gee’s expansive definition of the term, however, any executive who offers an opinion about the impact of unionization on the company he/she is charged with running could be charged with issuing threats or trying to coerce workers. If this ruling stands, it would chill any reasonable discussion between employers and employees about unionization and alternative ways to improve compensation, working conditions, and productivity.

As I wrote back in 2022, PPI strongly supports both workers’ right to organize unions and the First Amendment right to free speech. That’s why NLRB’s complaint against Jassy for expressing his opinion that Amazon workers would be better off without unions left us scratching our heads.

As it happens, most of the 5,800 workers at Amazon’s Bessemer, Alabama fulfillment center agreed with Jassy. In 2021, they voted overwhelmingly not to form a union. After labor activists cried foul, the NLRB ordered a second vote to be held in March 2022. It also failed.

Last fall, workers at an Amazon warehouse near Albany, NY also voted emphatically (66%) against unionization. These battles likely will continue, and the NLRB has an important role to play in making sure that managers don’t abuse their power to threaten workers’ livelihoods.

By the same token, however, the NLRB is supposed to be a neutral arbiter and should respect workers’ rights not to form a union. Not every organizing drive fails due to intimidation or dirty tricks by management. In this case, it’s hard to avoid the suspicion that the pro-union majority on the Labor Board didn’t like those results and is scapegoating Jassy.

For reasons we deeply respect, President Biden is strongly pro-union and Democrats have historically championed labor rights. But the issue here isn’t whether you are pro-labor or pro-business. It’s about respect for the Constitution and impartial enforcement of labor laws.

In any case, federal bureaucrats cannot arrogate to themselves the power to deprive any American citizen — even executives of powerful corporations — of their constitutional rights.

Where is the ACLU when we need them?