Feb 14 5:54 PM

Did a senator break a federal labor law with his Volkswagen statement?

by The Stream Team @ajamstream

Workers walk by the Volkswagen AG plant in Chattanooga, Tenn.

Erik Schelzig/AP

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) threw a potential wrench in a contentious unionization vote at Volkswagen's plant in Chattanooga, Tenn. on Wednesday when he said he had been "assured" that the plant would be given a new SUV production line if it rejects union representation from United Auto Workers.

Sen. Corker's statement, which was made on the first day of a three-day secret ballot at the plant, has labor experts scrambling to determine if he violated federal labor law. The National Labor Relations Act requires "laboratory conditions" for union elections in which workers are free to make decisions about organizing without being coerced or unduly influenced.

Regardless of whether Corker, pictured below, can be held personally liable, his statements could potentially invalidate the results of the unionization vote, which should be released Friday evening.

View the story "Did Sen. Bob Corker violate federal labor law?" on StorifyDid Sen. Bob Corker violate federal labor law?Sen. Corker's statements about a union election at the VW plant in Chattanooga, Tenn. raise questions about whether the result will stand. Storified by AJAMStream· Fri, Feb 14 2014 14:55:10YimgSen. Corker, who was instrumental in bringing VW to Chattanooga as mayor of the city, has vocally opposed unionizing the plant. His statement on Wednesday, however, may have crossed the line from opposition to interference, according to labor law experts.Many observers pointed out that if the assurances Corker spoke of came directly from VW, it would make the Senator a conduit for the company in attempting to influence the vote outcome, which would be a clear violation of federal labor law.Corker's Conundrum: He said VW execs told him if UAW loses, VW will add SUV line, If VW said that, it's breaking law http://t.co/gw3EAOhDFQSteven GreenhouseThe law in question is the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act, which codified an employer's First Amendment right to oppose a union, so long as the company does not attempt to influence workers' decisions by threatening reprisals or offering incentives if they vote one way or the other:Expression of views without threat of reprisal or force or promise of benefit The expressing of any views, argument, or opinion, or the dissemination thereof, whether in written, printed, graphic, or visual form, shall not constitute or be evidence of an unfair labor practice under any of the provisions of this subchapter, if such expression contains no threat of reprisal or force or promise of benefit.codes.lp.findlaw.comCorker has refused to say whether the tip about the SUV line came directly from VW. He defended his statement saying that his remarks acted as a counterweight to UAW's influence on plant workers. “When you’ve got a situation where only one entity is making its case," Corker said, "I believe it would be irresponsible for me — especially with the involvement, the background, the knowledge — not to be making these points.”

If the tip came from VW, it would contradict past statements made by the company, which has expressed openness to the possibility of a union in Chattanooga. VW has also said publicly that the unionization vote will have no bearing on the company's decision about whether to construct a new SUV production line in Chattanooga or its plant in Mexico.

Without knowing whether the tip came directly from VW, labor law experts are unsure about whether Corker can be held liable. Regardless, the votes integrity may be questioned.

Kenneth Dau-Schmidt, a professor of labor and employment law at Indiana University, said in an interview with The Tennessean: “Although there aren't many precedents where a party other than the employer attempts to intimidate the employees before an election, the purpose of NLRB elections under federal law is to get the employees’ free and informed decision about whether they want to be represented by the union.”

Harley Shaiken, who researches labor issues at the University of California-Berkeley, told Reuters, "If the senator's statement doesn't violate the letter of the law, it certainly violates the spirit of the law."

If VW plant workers reject unionization, Corker's comments could provide the UAW with grounds to contest the election and schedule another vote.

While the Senator's statement is the first to actually throw the legality of the vote in doubt, Chattanooga plant workers have not been free of outside influence. Conservative groups such as Americans for Tax Reform have invested heavily in fighting what they see as a potential tipping point for unionization at southern state auto plants.

Do you think Sen. Corker's statement compromises VW plant workers' unionization vote? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.

Attention

Did a senator break a federal labor law with his Volkswagen statement?

Related

Find Al Jazeera America on your TV

Get email updates from Al Jazeera America

Top Posts

Editor's Picks

Get email updates from Al Jazeera America

WATCH

Your World This Morning

Your World This Morning

Al Jazeera America News

Al Jazeera America News

Al Jazeera America News