Thursday, March 1st, 2007...12:00 pm
But, No One Has Seen Mitchell Wear Red Since the Cardinals Moved to the West Valley
John Shadegg has apparently fallen right off the deep end and landed squarely in the middle of Burpleson Air Force Base.
Shadegg’s campaign sent an e-mail out that trashed HB 800, the Employee Free Choice Act, and singled out one supporter in particular for condemnation. Shadegg made the same tired arguments that this is somehow a denial of rights to workers and is “un-American.” Then, he went from these silly and well worn charges to something a bit more creative:
For any member of Congress to support, let alone co-sponsor, this bill is disappointing. It is particularly disappointing that a fellow Arizonan, from a strong right-to-work state, would turn his back on workers’ rights. I call on Harry Mitchell to remove his name as co-sponsor and reject this extreme legislation. This legislation is so radical, it has been endorsed and supported by the Communist Party USA. As a new member of Congress, Mr. Mitchell would do well to listen to his constituents back home, not East Coast based Big Labor.
Shadegg giving some advice to Mitchell, I’m sure he is very sincere about that. Mitchell, in return, may want to remind Shadegg that these unions he is trashing have members in his district too.
The truly bizarre thing is Shadegg bringing up communism. When was the last time you saw anyone bring up accusations of communism in any serious debate in this country? Geez.
Shadegg may want to check the bill again, this bill so radical that it is supported by communists is also so radical that it is co-sponsored by one of his fellow Republican members, Peter King and has the support of many other members of his party.
9 Comments
March 1st, 2007 at 4:26 pm
I’m just flummoxed that anybody thinks this is a good idea. Maybe the current system of having the election on site could use some tweaking… But to suggest that a vote taken with a union heavy standing over your shoulder is a better system is simply ridiculous. Try again.
March 1st, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Yep…far better to have a corporate heavy influence you.
March 1st, 2007 at 5:43 pm
Funny how people are knee-jerk hostile to workers and unions, but don’t give one thought about corporate greed and abuse. But that’s the way it is because big business in this country created a systematic propaganda campaign against unions that goes back decades. Sadly, people like Gilbert Sun Devil have drank the Kool-Aid and parrot the corporate line like good little flunkies.
Btw, Shadegg is an anti-family puke. What could be more “pro-family” than a parent of a household to be able to make a decent enough wage to provide healthcare and a college education to his or her children. Shadegg is against workers making good wages. He’s anti-family. But at least he can still pick on the gays.
March 1st, 2007 at 10:07 pm
Statement by Rebekah Friend executive Director of the Arizona AFL-CIO
on House Passage of the Employee Free Choice Act
March 1, 2007
Today’s vote on the Employee Free Choice Act in the House of Representatives marks a momentous turning point in the growing movement to restore our nation’s middle-class. Today, the voices of tens of millions of working people who deserve the right to make a free choice to bargain for a better life have been heard and heeded on Capitol Hill.
These are people like, Mahelio Rico, who worked at Chas Roberts, who was fired for trying to form a union with the Sheet Metal Workers. Rico said he and his co-workers came together to form a union because they wanted to bargain for better working conditions and benefits. Today those workers and millions like them have new hope that they will have the opportunity to bargain collectively for better wages, benefits and working conditions.
Because of today’s vote, the future looks a little brighter to all Americans who have watched corporations celebrate record profits, but have themselves been shut out of the party, left with stagnant wages and facing soaring costs. A union card is the single best ticket into the middle-class and, thanks to the Employee Free Choice Act, working people may finally have the chance to be part of a union.
Labor law was intended from the outset to encourage working people to come together and bargain collectively for better wages and benefits than they would be able to get on their own. But in the past few decades, labor law has been so twisted by corporations and their union-busting hired guns that it is now virtually impossible to form a union against an employer’s wishes. The choice that should belong to
employees now belongs to employers. Corporations routinely fire, intimidate, harass and coerce workers during organizing campaigns, and labor law is helpless to stop them. The current process is rigged from the outset by the side that holds the power of the paycheck.
The changes made in the Employee Free Choice Act are not radical. It gives workers - not corporations - the right to decide how to vote for a union. It makes it harder for employers to interfere and levies real penalties on those that do. Finally, it creates a mechanism to ensure that corporations can’t endlessly stall a first contract.
For too long, it has taken heroes to form unions — brave men like Mahelio and so many others. If we are going to have an economy and a country that work for working people, that has to change. Today is the beginning of the change we need to see across the nation and in Arizona.
###
March 2nd, 2007 at 6:28 am
I just see this as allowing both sides equal opportunity to influence matters with their thugs and threats.
It’s obviously possible to arrange a solution which involves secret balloting AND not having the vote held under the thumb of the corporation in question. Such a solution would be far preferable to this.
March 2nd, 2007 at 7:08 am
I see this as the third in a series of things we need to fear…
Terrorism (used ‘red scare’ tactics that failed)
Immigration (using ‘red scare’ tactics that are failing)
Communism (hell, let’s use the real ‘red scare’, it worked in the early 50’s)
Perhaps we are seeing a preview of Rove’s ‘08 strategy.
Can you see McCain running for the WhiteHouse on a platform of Rolling back communism???
“By God, I spent years in a communist prison! I know how evil these commies are, and we need to stop them!”
March 2nd, 2007 at 9:17 am
azw88– that’s basically what W was doing in 2000. Why else do you think he appointed an expert in Russian language, culture, and politics to be his national security advisor? talk about completely misunderstanding the threats modern America faces.
Aside from that, I think this is great legislation. People keep talking about union thugs now being able to influence the vote, but how is a union thug going to force someone to sign a union membership card?
and anyway, we’re talking about unions here, it’s not like they can just afford to go down to a gym and pick up some muscle to intimidate anyone.
March 2nd, 2007 at 2:02 pm
Some Phoenix Guy,
You said:
“People keep talking about union thugs now being able to influence the vote, but how is a union thug going to force someone to sign a union membership card?”
Um, turn the scenario around. What if a big heavy from the evil corporation along with two security guards came around to every worker, handed him a card, and asked him to immediately vote on whether or not he wants a union? Naw. Can’t see how that would influence his vote one way or the other.
Give me a break!
March 2nd, 2007 at 2:56 pm
I’m not knee-jerk anti-union. I’m just not knee-jerk anti business either. Heck, if a majority of workers at a location decide - by secret ballot - to have a union, more power to them. As I stated, maybe the current system could use some tweaks. Many from the pro-union side seem to be arguing that the corporation currently excersises undue influence (although I’m having trouble seeing how a secret ballot allows for that). But if that’s the case, that the corp has too much influence over the ballot, and you are a fair person, how can you argue that having a union rep present you with a card to sign does not also represent undue influence? Union membership has been falling dratically in the private sector for decades. This looks to me like a simple attempt by unions to pump up their rolls.
As for your argument about a parent needing to make a decent wage… That sounds nice, but who gets to decide what a “decent wage” is? Current minimum wage will net you about $12K per year. That’s not enough. What about $20K? $50? $100K? Do single moms get to make twice as much as a two-parent household? Should we also put a cap on what the top earners can make? Should we index wage increases to inflation? Should the high performers be paid the same as someone that shows up late every day? Should someone in New Mexico make less than someone in CA where housing is 5 times more expensive? This is beginning to sound a lot like a planned economy. I’m in favor of letting the market forces work, and that includes that fair set-up of unions where the majority of workers vote for them.
Leave a Reply