b'mayvisitemployeesattheirhomes,aprivilegenotaccordedemployers.Thereisno reasontocompeltheemployertosubsidizetheunioncampaignaswell. (3)Thebill providesthatiftheNLRBsaysemployeesaredischargedforalleged unionactivitiesduringanorganizationalcampaignorduringnegotiationsforafirst laborcontract,theymustbereimbursedatdoubletheirwageratewithnoabatementfor interimearnings. COMMENT:Thisturnspresentlaw,whichisremedial,intoapunitivelaw.The proposalisdesignedtomakeanemployerthinktwicebeforedischarginganemployee,even forjustcause,intheapprehensionthathemaybechargedwithdiscrimination,andsubjecttopunitivedamages. Significantly,thebill doesnotprovidefordoublebackpayorevensinglebackpay ifanemployeeloseswagesbecauseofunionactivity. Inaddition,thebill wouldrequiretheimmediatereinstatementofthedischarged employee,evenbeforeadecisiononthemeritsofthecase.Allthatisnecessary wouldbefortheNLRBtotellthecourtthatit hasreasontobelievethattheemployee wasdischargedforunionactivity.Thisisalesserstandardofproofthanisordinarily required. (4)Thebill furtherproposesthatwhereanemployerisfoundguiltyofrefusing tobargainingoodfaithforafirstcollectivebargainingcontract,theNLRBmayaward theunionawageincreaseandincreasedbenefitsbaseduponcollective bargainingagreementselsewhereinvolvinglargeemployers. COMMENT:Theemployerisfacedwiththeimpositionofawagerateandbenefits basedonsettlementselsewherewhicharetotallyunrelatedtotheemployer\'sbusiness, andwouldbemanifestlyunfair.Thisalsogivestheunionanincentivetostallshould theemployer\'soffernotbetoitsliking.Thisisaviciousproposal,becauseitputs thegovernmentinapositionofdictatingalaborcontract,underminesprinciplesof freecollectivebargaining,andisasteptowardacontrolledeconomy. (5)Thebill providesthatemployersfoundbytheNLRBtohavewillfullyviolated afinalorderoftheboardmaybedebarredforthreeyearsfromgovernmentcontracts. COMMENT:Thisisanotherpunitiveaspectofthebill.Whileit isostensibly designedtoattacktheflagrantviolator,italsomaybeusedagainstotheremployers. (6)Thebillprovidesforunionizationofsecurityguardsbythesameunion thatmayrepresentrankandfileemployees. COMMENT:Underpresentlaw,guardscannotbemembersofanylabororganization thatadmitsintomembershipemployeesotherthanguards.Thereasonforthiswas obvious.It wastopreventdividedloyaltiesincaseswherethesecurityofproperty orpersonsmightbeinvolved. (7)Thebill providesfortheadditionoftwomemberstotheboarda"packing" measurethatincreasesthesizeoftheboardfromfivetoseven. COMMENT:Ostensibly,thisistoallowmoreexpeditioushandlingofcases.The factsare,however,thatanydelayisnotduetothesizeoftheboard.Whatthebill woulddo,however,wouldbetopacktheNLRBwithtwoadditionalmemberswithviews 11acceptable11tounions. THEABOVEDEMONSTRATESSOMEOFTHEREASONSWHYS.1883SHOULDBEDEFEATED. ITISAGAINSTTHEPUBLICINTEREST,ANDYOURSENATORSSHOULDBECONTACTED.'