Labor rights violation at the National Whistleblowers Center

¶ … Complaint Directed at Whistleblower Group

In their article in The New York Times, \"Complaint Directed at Whistle-Blower Group,\" Goldstein & Protess (2015) bring out the problematic issue of labor relations in organizations. The article describes two employees who were dismissed from employment for attempting to unionize their organization\'s workforce. The employees, Lindsey Williams and Richard Renner, worked for the National Whistleblowers Center (NWC), a Washington-based nonprofit law organization that represents whistleblowers. Ms. Williams and Mr. Renner were dismissed alongside three other colleagues, with the organization alleging that it intended to reorganize its staff so as to undermine the funding challenges it was facing.

Nonetheless, it emerged that Ms. Williams\' and Mr. Renner\'s efforts to unionize the organization\'s workforce antagonized the leadership. If unionized, the employees would be entitled to scrutinizing the financial records of the organization; the leadership was apparently not comfortable with such supervision. More importantly, an opportunity to inspect the organization\'s books would give the employees a firmer grounding to demand better wages. Though the other colleagues agreed to a settlement following the dismissal, Ms. Williams and Mr. Renner felt that the dismissal was unfair, and proceeded to file a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The case culminated in the center paying the two complainants an undisclosed amount and permitting the remaining employees to unionize.

The case between NWC and the two former employees exposes the proliferation of labor related problems within organizations. As per the National Labor Relations Act, employers are forbidden from \'interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees\' to unionize. Employees are entitled to assembling a union for purposes of collective bargaining, or working together to demand for better working conditions. Accordingly, an employer cannot dismiss, or threaten to dismiss or take disciplinary action against an employee because of their intention to organize a union. Equally, an employer cannot show favoritism to employees that do not support union activity over those that do. Based on this premise, it is evident that the decision of the NLRB to compel the organization to compensate the two complainants and permit union activity for the remaining employees was appropriate. The decision sent a clear message to all employers that the law must be adhered to stringently.

Instances of employers intimidating employees are common. Most employers often want their employees to remain non-unionized. When employees are not unionized, they usually have no or less bargaining power in terms of demanding for better wages and working conditions. As in the case of NWC, lack of union activity amongst employees often places employers in a better position to oppress their employees. To maintain the status quo, employers are usually inclined to counter any attempts by employees to form a union. Often, they will cleverly dismiss employees with intentions to assemble or rally their colleagues to form a union, or transfer or reassign them. However, with laws such as the National Labor Relations Act, such behavior will usually not go unpunished.

In an environment where organizations are predominantly motivated by profits, workers can often be at a disadvantage. Organizations are generally willing to make money at whatever expense, including neglecting the rights and welfare of their employees. It is unfortunate that even non-profit firms such as NWC are found resorting to such unjustified, and often, illegal actions. This largely explains why the leadership of the organization was unwilling to disclose the amount it would make from the $114 million compensation made by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to one of its clients, Bradley Birkenfeld. Unreported, undisclosed accruals make it easier for the organization to continue hiding under the disguise of financial woes. Its employees would have no reasonable reason to demand for bonuses or higher wages.

One of the primary objectives of any organization is to make profits. This is particularly true for profit-driven organizations. Nonetheless, the importance of employee rights and welfare remain of paramount importance. Employees are directly involved in the achievement of the organization\'s goals and objectives. In fact, they are arguably the most valuable asset of any organization. However, it is ironical that most organizations do not show due regards towards their employees. They will do whatever it takes to suppress the influence of their employees, especially with regard to their rights and welfare.