Labor historians agree: Over the past few decades, a change in political party at the White House usually signals a dramatic change in the federal government's approach to labor policy.

"Absolutely. This is not a close call," explains Robert Trumble, professor of management and director of the Virginia Labor Studies Center at Virginia Commonwealth University. "And the [U.S.] Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO see it the same way also."

Washington, D.C.-based journalist Phil Dine, author of "State of the Unions: How Labor Can Strengthen the Middle Class, Improve Our Economy, and Regain Political Influence," puts it this way: When a Republican administration is in power, unions are "persona non grata"; when a Democratic administration is in power, "[unions] are among the first people invited to the White House to forge new policies."

These differences in philosophy aren't limited to the way administrations approach policies regulating unions. For example, experts see a dramatic difference in the Obama administration's approach to worker safety and health.

Labor Lawyer: 'More Fines and Penalties and Blood in the Streets'

David Michaels, assistant secretary of labor for occupational safety and health

Speaking at a U.S. Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy roundtable on Jan. 22, new OSHA chief David Michaels declared: "Under this administration, OSHA is returning to the original intent of the OSH Act. We're a regulatory and enforcement agency and we're going to act like it."

"We're moving from reaction to prevention, beefing up enforcement and moving the regulatory agenda forward," Michaels added.

The numbers support Michael's declaration. The Labor Department's fiscal year 2010 budget funded 100 new OSHA inspectors, and the fiscal year 2011 budget proposes to hire 25 more inspectors and move 35 OSHA employees from compliance assistance to enforcement.

View article on one page