While I'm on the subject of unions and the democrats paying them back I have to comment on the Employee Free Choice Act currently being worked on by Congress. Again there hasn't been a whole lot of news coverage on the subject. It is just not sensational enough to get much play. From what I understand the bill has passed both in the House and the Senate and is now in joint committee to hammer out the final language for it. Again spokes people for the Bush Administration have said the President will veto the bill if it gets to his desk and in this instance I hope Mr. Bush does.
The Employee Free Trade Act has the unions salivating. This act would require companies to recognize and bargain with a union when they get a majority of the workers to sign cards saying they want their representation. It would eliminate the secret ballot voting process.
Today unions have to conduct a card signing drive and if they get a majority to sign cards they can petition the National Labor Relations Board to hold a secret ballot election. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1974 that this was the best way for determining whether or not employees want a union.
I experienced one of these drives a few years ago. There were three different unions trying to get cards signed. For some it can be very intimidating and for many of us we just signed the cards to get the union organizers out of our face. The unions bring out their best/worse professionals for the politicing. They try every way imaginable to convince you that you need them for your job protection, better wages, family security, benefits etc... etc... Then the company held their mandatory meetings with the employees trying to sell their side of the issue. The meetings were while you were on the clock and if nothing else it got you out of work for an hour or so. In the end all I could see is that it brought about more bad blood between our fellow workers and between the managers and employees. We did get a union and in the end they did diddly squat to save our jobs.
Union membership has been on the decline in the past decade or so. That stands to reason. Look at all the people that lost their jobs just to downsizing. Most of those shown the door were card carrying, dues paying union members. If this act is passed and for some change of heart signed by the President it would mean big bucks for the unions. Do you think the unions would bring up the fact that there would not be any voting if they got the majority of a work force to sign their cards? I think they would conveniently forget to mention that fact. Also, I think it wouldn't be too much of a stretch of imagination to see any union trying to get cards signed by intimidating workers to sign. I've even seen the threat of physical violence used to get the signatures. It can get ugly. For what they would bring in with the dues money some unions will try any tactic they can think of to use.
People have the right to chose what they want in their lives. I firmly believe the secret ballot election is best way for them to express their feelings. For that reason I think this act is bad. I urge you to at least contact our people in Washington to let them know it ain't right to give the unions that kind of leverage. Both Rep. Charlie Wilson and Sen. Sharrod Brown have web sites with portals to e-mail them. Just Google their names and it will take you there. Click on where is says "contact us". I hope this bill will never comes out of the joint committee. Just let it die there.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Apparently not too many people are interested in this subject but I'd like to make mention that we got noticed by an fellow blogger who is an attorney for a NYC law firm. See his comments at http://union-free.blogspot.com/2007/03/employee-free-choice-act-friday-roun
d.html. This was surprising to me & I'm honored.
Wow that didnt take you very long to get noticed did it?
I'M VERY INTERESTED BUT JUST A NOVICE, THE ATTORNEY MENTIONED YOUR BLOG ON THE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY SCREENERS AND I FOUND THAT EVEN MORE INTERESTING
Your comments on the unions is very interesting.
One thing that everyone forgets is that the threat of a union causes non-union shops to offer health care, pensions, and vacation time.
Do you think that they do it because they are nice guys?? Do you think any employer wants to pay time and a half for work over 40 hours in a week?
Spend some time researching information on why unions came to be formed and you will understand.
The comment that Unions have outlived there usefulness is a bunch of crap.
re: 4:44pm...I couldn't agree more. maybe these folks should work weekends and 16 hour days and never get a vacation or a day off and just get paid the minimum wage standard imposed by our government and they can go to work with 6,7 and 8 year old children. People fought and died in this country so that other people would not have to work in terrible and unsafe conditions for next to nothing. If you think unions have outlived their usefulness then you have become a pawn of corporate america. You have spit on the history of working class people.
Ole nib,
You are a hard guy to figure out. You claim that you work at a hateful job, and you were going to retire from 2 others? What happened? Did the union come in and shut down those jobs? Or did the NAFTA agreement (that was supposed to do so much for employment in this country and Canada have something to do with it?
I read that attorney bloggers comments on his website and I think that it is a bunch of Republican B.S.
I say keep the unions and keep supplying jobs to the India and other countries that have an ample supply of cheap, skilled labor (who do you talk to when calling tech support for a computer problem? It ain't a US citizen).
Let's be realistic, not idealistic about their usefulness. If your in one kudos to you, but it may be the downfall of your job. As for tea's comments, I say blah, blah, blah. There's no spittle being spewed at anyone. Our ansestors legacy is set in stone, employees organized unions because they had to work under deplorable working conditions. But, in tandem with all of the union crap, there were regulation after regulation, law after law passed (and enforced) to protect the worker. You rarely see deplorable working conditions anymore. You have got to be realistic. If we don't change then we will become a victim of our own stupidity. In additon, unions were historically founded in manufacturing settings. There is little manufacturing performed in the US, compared to 25 years ago. It's all been moved overseas (Reference my first paragraph). This argument can be compared to talking about religion and politics. Nobody ever wins and people go home with hurt feelings. But, in this case people are going home jobless because they were making 30 dollars an hour putting a friggen tire on a Dodge Dakota. Whereas a college educated person from India can do the same job for 75% less pay and still live comfortably. Go Union!
Enough banter...............
My profile says I had, emphasis on had, two jobs I thought I would retire from. In both cases I was laid off from each with no chance of retiring. If I live long enough I will have a token pension from both.
The first job was in the manufactoring sector. The corporation decided that our plant was no longer need. They came in and said we're closing the doors. The second job was in the service sector. The company came in one day and said we need to shrink ourselves to profitability. In both cases thousands of people suddenly found themselves unemployed. In both cases the unions were very much prevalent. In both cases I invested a total of over three decades of my life. In both cases I was a dutiful dues paying card carrying union member. When the end came "my" unions were not able to do a single blessed thing. In the second the unions agreed to take on more work for the surviving employees and allow out sourcing for other jobs. The small pensions I will eventually get will come from the fact that I was vested with both of those companies. The fact that I was vested was a result of laws passed in this country. It had absolutely nothing to do with what the unions did for me.
By the way, getting paid time and a half for working over 40 hours a week is a state law. You get that in any shop and if you don't you should be talking to the EEOC.
Ole Nib,
I may be wrong, but there aren't many unions out there working to eliminate jobs. Their primary purpose is to secure it's members better working conditions, benefits and wages. They do the best they can to get you as much as possible while you are working. After all, they get you a contract that covers working conditions, not what happens to you after you are no longer are employed by a company. The wages, benefits, and working conditions you had were a result of your union's efforts.
The 40 hr. week and the EEOC are both the result of organized labor's efforts in both Washington and Columbus.
Good for people to know.
Post a Comment