Yeah right balanced. A one sided view indeed. I squirmed through the 27 minutes and it was full of bias talk. I like the way he referenced his a NYT front page article as some sort of gospel on the matter.
Greenhouse is a shill for the unions and should have been fired by the NYT long ago but hey, the NYT is a shill for the union also.

Link to the article and be sure to read the last paragraph I didn't quote.

SAN FRANCISCO (BeyondChron) — In his September 14 story, “Union vs. Union,” New York Times reporter Steven Greenhouse relied on confidential sources (“outside labor experts”) to back SEIU’s false claims that an NUHW victory jeopardizes worker benefits under Kaiser’s current contract. Greenhouse interviewed a number of labor experts, but none was willing to publicly support the SEIU view. Yet instead of concluding that SEIU was wrong and/or lying, Greenhouse propped up SEIU’s falsehoods by claiming “outside labor experts” backed them. Greenhouse also failed to disclose a recent NLRB regional director’s finding that Kaiser violated federal law when it rescinded pay raises for workers who earlier voted to leave SEIU for NUHW — the exact situation now at issue.

New York Times reporter Steven Greenhouse has far more resources at his disposal than Moberg, and can pick up the phone and get nearly any labor expert in the country to talk to, and be quoted in, the Times. In fact, Greenhouse’s article cites two prominent labor experts, Nelson Lichtenstein and William Gould IV, neither of whom were quoted to support SEIU’s legal position.
Contrary to Times policy, Greenhouse never explained why he cited “outside labor experts” rather than providing their names. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that Greenhouse did not like what he heard from labor experts willing to be identified, so relied on unnamed sources to bolster SEIU’s multi-million dollar disinformation campaign.

And Times editors should be particularly troubled by Greenhouse’s omission of the NLRB regional director’s ruling on this legal question. The opinion of the preeminent government agency on federal labor law should be given greater weight than the “outside labor experts” Greenhouse preferred.
A Journalistic Failure

Greenhouse’s article fails on journalistic grounds for other reasons as well.
First, his fundamental framing is that Sal Rosselli “did create a rival union” and that he is now using “brass knuckles” against SEIU. Greenhouse knows perfectly well that NUHW was created, and could only legally have been created, by workers themselves.