Was it intended to have that effect?

Then, there is "process." The NLRB, from their site:
   

The National Labor Relations Board is an independent federal agency created by Congress in 1935 to administer the National Labor Relations Act, the primary law governing relations between unions and employers in the private sector. The statute guarantees the right of employees to organize and to bargain collectively with their employers, and to engage in other protected concerted activity with or without a union, or to refrain from all such activity.

The NLRB was developed to serve as the protector for BIG LABOR.  Not the employees, but the organizations which hold business hostage by abuse of government and its tools.  Calls of "fairness" for the workers are cheap curtains which cloak the abuses that organized labor heaps on business owners and used to deny real performance rewards to employees.

In a "protected" union environment, the government serves not as a catalyst for enhanced relations and better development for an employee's talents, but as an anchor on that employee, who then cannot excel by adding uniqueness to the work environment.  Michigan's story is replete with accounts of grievances brought up against some employees for attempting to do the tasks of others.  In these cases it is not the management which has a say in the matter, but the labor union itself.

Hardly indicative of a business owner making the decisions.  Government doesn't care.  It gets in the way, and prevents management from exercising proper procedure and properly implementing reward based compensation.

What if a GM or Chrysler employee noticed a process in the line, that if altered would allow a 20% reduction in labor costs through a reduction of workers needed to accomplish a similar task.  The short answer is that employee's idea would likely not be implemented and rewarded, and that the idea would be fought simply for the "job security" aspect by the UAW.  

A free market rewards innovation, yet in this example it would be stifled by a government protected monopoly of labor interest.  The business owner (GM or Chrysler) would not see the benefit, because it is not allowed to, by government and the special interest which controls it.  The worker is relegated to merely accepting the best that the workforce as a "unit" can derive for compensation.  Thus there is no incentive to create, save or innovate.

The other side of the NLRB is as a tool for punishment.

As a business owner you are always at risk.  Particularly if you have a "diverse," or a "potentially diverse" workforce.  Sexism, or racial discrimination can be alleged easily when it costs nothing to a disgruntled and removed employee, whether deserved or not. If they don't believe you "think correctly" you will likely spend months and possibly a good part of your operating income fighting such charges.    Charges that could not be brought if government stayed out of your business.  

Do I push the limit by even suggesting that business be made free of such worries?

The very fact that a business owner must use precious resources in the defense of what might likely be sound decisions (hiring, firing, promotions, reallocation, etc..) against a government which has no bottoms to its legal wallet is anathema to the concept of private property, a right we cherish as being born with, and should have protected by our constitution.  That decisions we make, could, and will be suspect, if another whom we are not bound to, has objections to those decisions.

Smoking as an another example. What if your business wanted to cater to smokers?  What if that was to be your model?  What if you just wanted to have smoking because you thought that smokers have a nice smile, and glowing fresh breath? It shouldn't matter, whether in your own home or business, yet Michigan's legislature assumes it is important enough to limit YOUR choice as a business owner and they have now nearly crafted legislation that this sitting governor would easily sign.  A limit that says you cannot determine the atmosphere in your business. No matter that no customer, nor employee has ever been bound by servitude to you, and FORCED to endure it.

Yet at the same time, they have not the courage to simply outlaw smoking in the state altogether.

And yet there is even more..

But this writing is merely an introduction to a project that in the coming weeks will examine the failures of government in its role with regard to business in Michigan.