Katie Packer writes at Townhall:

On September 2, 2009, the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA), International Association of Machinists (IAM) and other unions asked the National Mediation Board (NMB), which oversees RLA elections, to change the traditional majority rules voting process to a minority rule voting process – allowing the will of a small group of employees to dictate the fate of the entire workgroup. What does this mean? Instead of requiring a majority of employees to vote for union representation, a majority of only those voting in the election would be required. This would in essence assume that anyone not casting a ballot is, in fact, in favor of union representation.

Of course, they didn't ask for other changes, like creating a decertification process or allowing workers to opt out of their union dues. They want to make it easier to unionize, and leave workers with the same near-impossibility of ever voting the union out. Doesn't sound fair, does it?

Even previous Democratic administrations didn't think such a rule change would be fair. The current majority rules voting process has been in place for 75 years, and has been applied and reaffirmed unanimously by the NMB...It's certainly not an anti-union process – unions have won 65 percent of the more than 1,850 elections since 1934. But somehow those winning odds aren't good enough – the unions want to stack the deck in their favor.

More here and here.