I had technical problems as it turns out the HELP committee’s live feed only works in Firefox or IE.  You can watch here.  Harkin just finished his questions for Becker.  Floor is to Isakson.

Isakson: Asking about change in how mediation board is considering changing organizing rules for airlines.  Wants Becker to understand power of these boards.

Isakson: Would you favor NLRB limiting employer involvement?

Becker:  When I was a teacher, I wrote an extended article to address history of board regulation of labor elections.  It was an attempt to contribute to scholarly debate about regulation of labor elections.  Who are appropriate parties?  It was intended to be provactive.  I woudl suggest the article is addressed to Congress about how labor elections should be governed.

Current law provides right to employers to have their views.  Clear that employers have a right to express views on if employees should unionize.  That writing should not be construed to think that I am in favor of restricting employer speech.

Isakson: Do you respect Congress’ role in writing laws, and Congress respects role of scholars to debate it?

Becker: I understand NLRB role is different from role of scholar, and part of that role is to respect will of Congress.

Brown: How does your experience in negotiations play into conflicts between employers and labor?

Becker: Difference between scholar and practioner is as the latter you’re engaged on a daily basis with employers.  You have to understand rights and interests of the other side.  Can’t be a good labor lawyer without understanding their interests.  As with law, you reach agreement most of the time when you recognize each others’ interests.  Same with collective bargaining.  Practice of labor law, unlike teaching, has daily contact that is enriching.  One of the things I’m most proud of is that many mangement lawyers I’ve worked with in Chicago have written to Senate expressing their confidene in my ability to be impartial.

McCain: I want NAM’s letters and letters from 600 other organizations included.

McCain: Do you provide support to ACORN?

becker: No, never.

McCain: Did you work with SEIU to obtain representation for home health care workers with Gov Blagojevich?

Becker: I provided counsel to SEIU Local and met with Blago’s staff and once with Blago himself about home health care organizing.  My recommendations dealt with technicalities in legislation for organizing these workers.

McCain: They needed your expertise.

Becker: I’ve done this in other states including CA.  I have expertise.

McCain: How many cases involving SEIU would you have to recuse yourself?

Becker: Difficult, but SEIU is rarely party to board proceedings.

McCain: What about NUHW cases?

Becker: I have not been involved with that matter.

McCain: But you worked for SEIU

Becker: Yes, but I wasn’t involved.

McCain: Would you recuse yourself?

Becker: This is something I considered when looking at the nomination.  This led to ethics agreement under which circumstances I would recuse myself in which SEIU is a party for two years.  I would consider future questions after those 2 years with the ethics board and recuse myself if necessary.

McCain: It’s not complicated, it reads I would recuse myself after 2 years with SEIU issues.  There seems to be several you’d have to recuse yourself often.

Becker: I will abide by that pledge.  And if there are other issues that people have I would consider recusing myself if people brought it up.

McCain: That’s not good enough.  If your past employer is involved, you should recuse yourself.

Hatch: Can I submit my questions?  I have to leave.

Merkeley asking now.  To be honest, softballs about sharing stories.  I’m multi tasking….

Becker now talking about the management attorneys who support his nomination.

FRANKEN!  Thanks for coming to this unusual, unique hearing.  I’m a member of 4 labor unions, don’t know how many others are.  I appreciate how important this area of the law is.

Most people who are nominated to the NLRB have either represented workers, or management.

Becker: Yes, it’s a divided bar.

Franken: Enzi’s staffer represented management for his entire career.  It’s not unusual for someone who’s represented labor to be nominated to the NLRB.

Becker: Correct

Franken: This whole thing about the SEIU, it’s happened before.  If they represented a firm, they could recuse themselves if a former client appears before the board.  Nothing unusual there.  You answered some 200 questions, right?

Becker: Yes

Franken: How long did they have to answer the questions?

Becker: I don’t know, but there’s been a back and forth since the spring.  Whoever had questions had months to submit them to you.

Franken: This is an unusual hearing.  I’m new the Senate, but it’s unique.  Only other board hearing was for a chair.  This wasat the insistence of one member who held your nomination.  Did that member submit any questions to you?

Becker: No.

Franken: Really.  He, or she (ed: McCain) didn’t submit any questions over all those months.  Huh.

SIDENOTE:  That was awesome.  Franken really ripped McCain a new one i his questioning of Becker.  And now the feed’s cutting in and out…

Bob Casey is putting me to sleep.

Harkin: Markup on nomination at 10am tomorrow (Thursday).  People can submit questions, but he’s already answered more than 280. One last question, Mr. Becker: will you recuse yourself from cases involving SEIU according to your pledge?

Becker: Yes

Harkin: Thank you.  To your family, you must be very proud of Craig Becker.  I say that as someone who comes from a working class family.  Those who represent working people who help them secure their rights, I can think of no better calling.  I’m very proud of you and that you’ll be on the NLRB.  We’ll report this out of committee on Thursday.  I don’t know what the floor will be like but I assure you we will move this as expeditiously as possible on the floor so you can get to work.  It’s about time this board starts doing things.  Thank you very much.

Becker: Thank you.