Reference no: EM13857938

POST 1:

How do you think the president's political outlook plays into who is appointed to sit on the board?

The president more than likely chooses NLRB representatives that are on the same accord as his views, goals, and agendas. It's tough to see it not go his way. Most decisions whether small or big will be of the presidents liking and representatives will more than likely consult with the president and get his opinions or actually get their decision from him. "Each member is appointed by the president of the United States for a staggered term, meaning that each member's term ends at a different time so that the entire board is not replaced all at once. The members serve as judges and hear disputes between management and labor in cases appealed to the board. Because they are political appointees, the decisions by the board tend to represent the current thinking of the administration" (Seaquist, 2015).

How might this impact the decisions made by the board from presidential term to term?

The fact that board members are term to term can inflict conflict on the president and his shared views and goals. With varying members being pro-labor or pro-management issues can and will arise. The president for sure would have to work harder in getting opposing members to see his views and get onboard with whatever decisions need to be made and various issues that need to be handled.

POST 2:

Currently there are five national labor board members, each board member has right to serve the nation for a five year time period ; while the role of general counsel has been based on four year terms and there has been and with Obama in office. Board members are appointed by the president and the counsel is approved with the sensate. One of the biggest issues facing labor and unionization was the Employee Free Choice Act, this act proposed that unions would be able to vote on issues with signed cards and with a percentage of them being signed and submitted it would allow for secret ballot elections versus public or over ridden however if it was 50% or above the union would automatically win without having the use of a voting system in place to come to common terms or agreements. This Act was not even as Obama said he would take care of it. I don't feel that the president's choice of appointed board members plays a large role in how outcome would be on issues when the public and laborers can still freely speak and object, also there is congress and senate to still face so there are more individuals throwing in their perspectives on key issues. There are also local governors and their ideas on labor laws and acts for their state and of course their views and backing on being republican or democratic as democrats are big into unions, the same with those sitting in the decision making seats.

POST 3:

The political reasons public pensions are underfunded are when the stock market goes up the public pensions are underfunded, and of using that money for something with an immediate payoff.

Pensions have been dispersed longer due to people living longer. This problem was not considered in the beginning. So this will result in having to give out smaller pensions. To make pensions last the states will have to give out smaller pensions.

I think eventually there is not going to be any money left for pensions. There is just not enough money to keep up the pensions.

POST 4:

The political reasons public pensions are underfunded is because politicians are betting on unrealistic investments down the road to cover their underpayments that they are giving now. This is a huge risk because if the investments down the road are not as high as the politicians are hoping for the workers could lose their pensions.

If the pension problem is political, what steps would have to occur to remedy the problem? Do you think such a remedy will ever take place?

These politicians that are promising these pension plans should be made to pay up. I believe there should be a law put in place where they are not allowed to underpay hoping that investments will cover them in the long run.

If you do not see a remedy for the situation, what do you predict will happen to public pensions in the future?

If there is not a remedy to this issue the funding will simply run out of money. People should start taking matters into their own hands and start saving for retirement because depending on a future pension plans is very risky.