Why Business is Hysterical About Card Check...And Why America Needs It

[Earth Bound Misfit]

X- posted in Labor: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=367&topic_id=18475&mesg_id=18475

The "Card Check" Hullabaloo
By Mike Whitney

March 19, 2009-- Big business has launched a no-holds-barred propaganda blitz against the Employee Free Choice Act. Their goal is to scare people into believing that if the bill passes it will trigger higher unemployment and a deeper recession. According to opponents, there's even the threat of creeping socialism. The truth, of course, is far less dramatic. The Employee Free Choice Act or so called "card check" simply makes it easier for unions to organize.

snip

The lies and disinformation about the EFCA have been so extreme, they border on ridiculous. These guys are playing for keeps and it shows. The Wall Street Journal has run five anti-EFCA articles this week alone, each one more vicious than the last. It will take a superhuman effort to get this bill passed. It all depends on how much pressure the unions can bring to bear on Congress. If they get sidetracked or bogged down, they'll lose, for sure. They must stay focused.

snip

"Powerful Corporate Front Groups... are carrying out one of the biggest Anti-Union Busting campaigns in history, hoping to wrench public opinion in their direction and spread misinformation about the Employee Free Choice Act...Several anti-union Corporate Front Groups plan to collectively spend almost $100 million in the next year against the bill and those who support it. The breakdown is as follows (from the National Journal):

Chamber of Commerce: $20-30 million

Coalition for a Democratic Workplace: $30 million

Employee Freedom Action Committee: $30 million

Freedom's Watch: $30 million (from one anti-union contributor)

Center for Union Facts: unknown, but in the millions (http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2009/03/35512.php)

snip

After the 1929 crash, the economic downward spiral was caused mainly by falling wages. Despite all promises of maintaining production, goods could not be sold as fast as they were produced because of a collapse of income due to layoffs and wage reductions. Globalization in the past two decades temporarily kept US purchasing power increasing despite a slow growth of domestic wages. This resulted from still lower wages in the emerging markets. Now the world is awash with overcapacity in relations to low demand caused by insufficient wage levels. ("The Global Economy in Transition", Henry C.K. Liu)

Unions have steadily lost ground since the 1950s when they represented 32 percent of the total workforce in the US. Today, union membership has dwindled to less than 8 percent, which is too small to have any real impact on policy. Even if we ignore the appalling lack of political power or the growing wealth gap, which is greater than any time since the Gilded Age, the same fundamental problem still arises: How does one sustain aggregate demand if wages stay stagnant? The answer is; it can't be done, which is why labor must have a bigger place at the table to level the playingfield. The only way to build a strong, stable economy, and avoid the boom and bust cycles brought on by speculative bubbles, is by empowering workers and making sure they are fairly compensated for their labor. The Employee Free Choice Act is an important first step in that direction.

ETA link: http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22250.htm

[AndyTiedye]

1. We May Not Win This One, But We Will At Least Make Them Stimulate the Economy a Bit Fighting Us

Kicked and recommended, of course.

:kick:

[Earth Bound Misfit]

2. We will win this. n/t

[PVnRT]

3. Question about the act...

...having not been in a place actively organizing (the two union jobs I had, the unions were already there in closed shops).

How does it work now? As I understand it, it's a secret ballot, and the bosses can secretly "convince" employees to vote down the union.

How does the "card check" work and how will it combat this?

[Earth Bound Misfit]

4. Seccret ballot is not mandatory.

Section 2 of EFCA amends Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act. Currently Section 9(c) consists of five sections governing when the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) shall conduct hearings as to whether "a question of representation affecting commerce" exists between an employer and its employees. Inter alia it provides, in subsection 1B, that


If the Board finds upon the record of such hearing that such a question of representation exists, it shall direct an election by secret ballot and shall certify the results thereof. http://www.upa.pdx.edu/IMS/currentprojects/TAHv3/Content/Depression/National%20Labor%20Relations%20Act.pdf

Generally speaking, an employer has the option of recognizing the Union by accepting the "petition" as proof that a majority of it's workers wish to unionize, or "question" the petition, which results in the NLRB calling for a "secret ballot" election. An election is usually held in about 6 wks, it's during these periods when the employer "educates" their employees about unionization.

EFCA would add two new subsections to Section 9(c):
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s111-560


SEC. 2. STREAMLINING UNION CERTIFICATION.
(a) In General- Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 159(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following:

(6) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, whenever a petition shall have been filed by an employee or group of employees....alleging that a majority of employees...wish to be represented by an individual or labor organization for such purposes, the Board shall investigate the petition. If the Board finds that a majority of the employees in a unit appropriate for bargaining has signed valid authorizations designating the individual or labor organization specified in the petition....the Board shall not direct an election but shall certify the individual or labor organization as the representative described in subsection (a).

`(7) The Board shall develop guidelines and procedures for the designation by employees of a bargaining representative in the manner described in paragraph (6). Such guidelines and procedures shall include--

`(A) model collective bargaining authorization language that may be used for purposes of making the designations described in paragraph (6); and

`(B) procedures to be used by the Board to establish the validity of signed authorizations designating bargaining representatives.

[Earth Bound Misfit]

5. Majority sign-up would not only end the employer MANDATED

http://www.examiner.com/x-2071-DC-Special-Interests-Examiner~y2009m1d13-Secret-ballot-argument-against-Employee-Free-Choice-&feature=player_ded">"educational" period, it would effectively eliminate the multi-leveled appeal process that comes with the "sacred" secret ballot elections.

My company voted by a 72% majority to unionize in early June '07... 22 months and ENDLESS appeals (delay tactic) later, my employer has just plain REFUSED to recognize the Union. UNDER CURRENT LAW, THERE ARE NO PENALTIES FOR DOING THIS. EFCA would add strict penalties to offending companies.

Martin Jay Levitt wrote in his book Confessions of a Union Buster

...Levitt’s first union-busting campaigns introduced him to the most “common strateg among management lawyers.” First, Levitt tells us, “Challenge everything ... then take every challenge to a full hearing ... then prolong each hearing” as long as possible, then “appeal every unfavorable decision.”

According to Levitt there was method to the madness. “If you make the union fight drag on long enough, workers...lose faith, lose interest, lose hope.” Taking away people’s hopes, their aspirations for a better future – that was Levitt’s job.

[anigbrowl]

6. As you've described it above, it wouldn't require a secret ballot either.

I agree with you about the endless appeals process and suchlike. On the other hand, I am in favor of holding a secret ballot. I think everyone should have the opportunity to sign up for unionization, but I also think everyone should have the right to make the binding decision privately.

[Raineyb]

7. They're not taking away the secret ballot. What they're trying to do is

end the employer forcing the election while taking the time to fire organizers and strong arm workers in mandatory meetings.

The secret ballot is not necessary now. An employer can choose to recognize the union just on card check. But most don't then actively work to undermine union organizing by forcing the secret ballot. Why should the employer have any say in whether or not the workers join a union. It's the workers organization it's none of the employer's business.

Regards

[Earth Bound Misfit]

8. Secret Ballot, NLRB style---Not so "secret"

It is a http://www.examiner.com/x-2071-DC-Special-Interests-Examiner~y2009m1d13-Secret-ballot-argument-against-Employee-Free-Choice-&feature=player_ded">Secret Ballot In Name Only


FREE AND FAIR? HOW LABOR LAW FAILS U.S. DEMOCRATIC STANDARDS