Sir, Step Away From The Rat

The rat — that sweet inflatable rat you see in front of union wrath-incurring job sites — may not be around much longer after the National Labor Relations Board ruling that deemed it confrontational and beyond the pale of normal free speech:

The inflatable rubber rat, bucktoothed bane of strikebreakers and emblem of union wrath, may be headed for retirement. The National Labor Relations Board is now considering a case that could make it harder to employ one on a picket line.

At issue in the case is whether the rat is the equivalent of picketing, which can be restricted under federal law, or a form of free speech, which enjoys far fewer limitations. The case, which was filed three years ago, is slowly percolating through the system, but the labor board is poised to make a ruling. If it decides the rat is, indeed, a form of picketing, it could have a chilling effect on its use.

“It’s going to inhibit the rat,” said Alvin Blyer, the director of the Brooklyn, Queens and Long Island region of the board. The board’s national office will eventually rule on the case.

For those unfamiliar with the rat, consider this description provided in a ruling by Steven Davis, an administrative law judge for the board who heard the case in his Brooklyn court in March:

“The rat presents an imposing figure,” the ruling says. “The rats here were 15 or 30 feet high. The body of the rat is gray with pink eyes, ears and nose. Its sits on its haunches with its front paws outstretched and claws extended. Its mouth is open, baring its teeth.”

. . .

In his 30-page opinion, Judge Davis ruled against the rat.

“The union’s use of the rat,” he wrote, “constituted confrontational conduct intended to persuade third persons not to do business with Concrete [Structures Inc., which filed complaint against the Laborers’ Eastern Region Organizing Fund, the body that puts out the rat].”

He continued: “A rat is a well-known symbol of a labor dispute and is a signal to third persons that there is an invisible picket line they should not cross.”

The union has appealed the judge’s ruling, and its lawyer, Lowell Peterson, said he was confident the rat would survive, even if the labor board decides against it.

“Ultimately, I think the rat will be vindicated, if you will,” he said. “Their theory that there’s something magical about the rat is wrong. There’s nothing magical about a rat — it’s just ugly.”

If the rat was banned, the union’s lawyer promised to use a skunk instead.

The rat in question: