Trump Just Fired a CWAer

[Omaha Steve]

FIGHTING FOR ECONOMIC JUSTICE & DEMOCRACY

Trump just fired Jennifer Abruzzo, a former CWA attorney, as the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel. The NLRB is the government agency that protects workers’ rights. As the government’s top labor lawyer, Abruzzo held CEOs accountable when they broke the law.
While she was at the NLRB, Abruzzo accomplished a lot to improve workers' lives. She made union certification automatic when workers' unions show majority support and employers interfere in the union election process. She also advocated for increased payouts to workers who were fired for union organizing. Abruzzo has dedicated her career to fighting for workers’ rights and holding employers who violate our rights accountable.

In contrast, during his first term, Trump appointed union-busting lawyer Peter Robb to the position. Robb used his time at the NLRB to make it harder for workers to organize and to give companies more power at the bargaining table. Instead of holding CEOs accountable, he gave them a green light to take advantage of their employees.

Send a message to the White House and tell Trump that firing Jennifer Abruzzo was the wrong choice and he must appoint an NLRB General Counsel who will stand with working people, not CEOs.

https://actionnetwork.org/letters/the-nlrb-general-counsel-must-protect-workers-rights

In unity,
Dan Mauer
CWA Director of Government Affairs

[claudette]

1. What is

a CWAer?

[Omaha Steve]

2. UNION: Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO, CLC.

My wife belonged for 18 years.

[claudette]

5. Thanks

😊

[Deuxcents]

3. I'm a retired CWAer.

[Americanme]

4. I worked with a few CWA workers

I was UWUA (Utility Workers Union of America), but we would sometimes run joint trench with Michigan Bell, and they were CWA. Great bunch of workers.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

6. There are legal constraints in place that are designed to prevent many of the president's recent firings. So why is Trum

There are legal constraints in place that are designed to prevent many of the president's recent firings. So why is Trump making the moves anyway?
https://bsky.app/profile/rcooley123.bsky.social/post/3lgyhamz7cs2f

Link to tweet

Why Trump’s personnel purges are likely to end up in court

Late last week, Donald Trump fired as many as 17 inspectors general without cause. These government watchdogs are responsible for investigating internal wrongdoing, possible ethical…”

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trumps-personnel-purges-are-likely-end-court-rcna189850

The so-called “midnight massacre” was controversial for a variety of reasons, not least of which is that Trump’s move appears to be at odds with federal law. The New York Times report explained, “The firings defied a law that requires presidents to give Congress 30 days’ advance notice before removing any inspector general, along with reasons for the firing. Just two years ago, Congress strengthened that provision by requiring the notice to include a ‘substantive rationale, including detailed and case-specific reasons” for the removal.’”

Trump evidently didn’t care about the legal constraints....

As the week progressed, the list of firings grew. The Washington Post reported on the president firing “Democratic members of two independent federal commissions,” which represented “an extraordinary break from decades of legal precedent.”

On Monday night, he dismissed two of the three Democrats on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission — Jocelyn Samuels and Charlotte Burrows, formerly the chair, the White House confirmed Tuesday. He also fired the chair of the National Labor Relations Board, Gwynne Wilcox, a Democrat, an NLRB spokesperson confirmed Tuesday. Trump also removed the EEOC’s general counsel, Karla Gilbride, who oversaw civil actions against employers on a range of issues, including discrimination claims from LGBTQ+ and pregnant workers. And he terminated Jennifer Abruzzo, the NLRB’s general counsel.

It might be tempting to think a new administration is going to make all kinds of personnel changes, so no one should be too surprised by widespread firings.....

There’s also a larger concern about whether the White House wants to do away with the very idea of independent commissions and boards, centralizing even more power and authority in the Oval Office.

But I'm also struck by the through-line: There are legal constraints in place that are designed to prevent many of these firings. The question is why the president appears indifferent to these limits

There will be some fun lawsuits to watch due to these illegal terminations