Just to be clear, I’m not arguing that this is illegal. I’m arguing that this is patently WRONG. In short, if the law does allow the government to tell a company what states it can decide to put a factory, that law needs to be changed.Each state has different laws, levels of taxation, pools of employees with the right skills, access to materials, etc, but when a company is looking to build a factory, there are certainly some areas that the government should have input on. Zoning and environmental concerns are a couple examples of this, but the federal government shouldn’t have a damn bit of input as to what state that factory goes.Corporations do not own unions, and unions do not own corporations. Just as a corporation cannot force a union into accepting new pay rules, or ending a strike, the unions should not be able to force corporations into building an expansion where they would like them to.Every time a union strikes, that corporation has to weigh the cost of loss of income during that time with the costs of shutting down and moving. If a union can use the government to force a company to build where they want them to, then that basically means the union has some sort of de facto ownership.It doesn’t matter one l bit what reasoning Boeing has to want to build a new plant in South Carolina, and I’m sure the right to work aspect came into the equation. Why shouldn’t it? If the unions in the Northwest can cost them over a billion in profits during strikes in recent years, I’d like you to tell me why a smart business WOULDN’T take that into consideration?Regardless of your personal opinion on the subject, there is no right to keep a business anywhere, any more than there is a right to force them to stay somewhere. The government can obviously regulate on details, but not the right to make choices like this for them.None of this makes any sense. The National Labor Relations Board should be ashamed of itself, whoever made this call should be fired and if the rules actually do allow this sort of thing (which doesn’t seem clear), then they need to be changed. The NLRB is supposed to be an arbiter between corporations and their unions, not an extension of union interests – or the other way around.

Share Your Thoughts & Share on Social Media if you Agree