Comments on: Disappointed

By: Tina

Tina — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 23:31:55 +0000

to the poster who scoffed at workers putting together a decert election, as if this was difficult, you clearly don’t know how easy it is. it is very difficult to unionize, what with all the union busting consultants, captive audience meetings, etc. but if and when workers decide they want a decert election, easy as pie. the employer bends over BACKWARDS to make this type of election go forward. seen it.

By: GoWildcats

GoWildcats — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 22:04:49 +0000

I like what CrabbyPirate has to say in general, but I gotta disagree with him/her about SEIU. That so-called union has done more to discredit EFCA than any sleazy lobbyist for the Chamber of Commerce could ever dream of. In the past several,months SEIU has:

1. Waged an unprincipled battle with another union, the California Nurses Association, before negotiating a truce last month.
2. Been the subject of a series of articles in the Los Angeles Times detailing alleged corruption by top union officials in California and the Midwest. At least four SEIU officials in California, Michigan and Illinois have resigned from office and/or been reassigned by SEIU after allegations of corruption.
3. Attempted to lure already-unionized UNITE HERE workers right here in Arizona to break away from their strong and democratic union and join a fake “union” affiliated with SEIU.

I could go on and on. The point is, in his quest for more and more power, SEIU Chief Andy Stern has shown utter disdain for employee free choice.

By: GoWildcats

GoWildcats — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 21:33:28 +0000

Agree with Tina that employers arguing for the sanctity of the secret ballot are cynical and disingenuous. Having been involved in NLRB elections before I can tell you they are a joke. Employers use union-busting law firms to try to scare and intimidate workers, sometimes even breaking the law in the process. The penalties for transgressions are laughable. A cynic might argue it is irrational not to break the law when the “reward” for doing so far outweighs the penalties.

Even if a majority of workers withstand the employers’ harassment campaigns and vote for the union, employers can and do use the NLRB process to delay union recognition — sometimes for five years or more.

Most unions long ago concluded that it is wrong and immoral to subject workers to NLRB elections and their aftermath. It’s like painting big red targets on their backs and telling the boss to fire away. That is why most private sector workers who have organized themselves into unions in recent years have done so using the card-check process. Nobody (except the Chamber of Commerce and the National Right to Work Committee) ever complained. I never met a worker who said – “please, please don’t accept the democratic choice of me and my co-workers. Please don’t let us have a voice on the job. Please subject us to captive audience meetings and make veiled threats about how you’re going to close up shop if the union gets in. Please don’t allow us to bargain for health insurance or a decent pension.”

George McGovern should be ashamed of himself.

By: Crabby Pirate

Crabby Pirate — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 21:19:32 +0000

Donna, you right, we do need to consider the resources that business interest have. And I agree unions do more than strictly organize and recruit which is what bothers me about many of them.

I’d like to see unions focus more on organizing (and yes I see the contradiction in my statement and my position against EFCA). Still weighing this issue out in many respects.

By: Donna

Donna — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 19:39:29 +0000

Crabby, union busting is ONLY a $4b industry because union busting is ALL THEY DO. Not to mention that these firms work in concert with the companies who hire them, having all the resources of those companies at their disposal. It is a David and Goliath situation for the union organizers. Unions do much, much, more than organize and recruit new members.