Card Check, the good, bad, and ugly

[dannyboy]

Card check is an interesting play by the union to get its foot in the door of businesses that otherwise would be very hard to enter.

The way they get in now is by secret ballot. Every member has the right to vote by secret ballot, and the union and company is bound by the vote.

Under card check, it is an open ballot. That allows for the union to get signatures without secret ballot. In other words, they, the union, get to watch while you either sign or refuse to sign the ballot. They have the right to visit the employees at home, after hours, and repeatedly so, until they get you to sign the ballot. This system allows for the age old union tactic of intimidation of those workers that do not want union representation, or even more so, the workers that want the ability to vote by secret ballot.

This so called "employee free choice act" does not even give the employee that free choice. It is not only tilted toward the union, it gives them greater power and massive control over the whole process, and takes free choice away from those they seek to represent.

I realize that the unionization of FedEx is a hot topic here on BC. But to be short sighted and allow something like this into law just to satisfy UPS's short term goals is bad policy.

It would seem to me that the unions need to offer something that the workers want. Make it so nice and wonderful that they would line up at the hall wanting to join.

But those days are long gone. Instead of allowing free choice, they would rather be in charge at any cost, including at the expense of the "right to free choice" of the very workers they want to bring into the fold.

d

 

[island1fox]

Danny boy,
I agree with your post. At first glance as a long time UPSer --the FEDX situation came to mind immediately. Then I realized what we are seeing all around us ---government ownership in Banks, Car Companies, Insurance companies, telling us not to smoke and drink --Taxing in excess if we do '
telling us what cars to drive ,what to keep our thermostats on etc etc etc-Now with the help of Obama the big LOBBY GROUP that he was not going to listen to ---"NO MORE POLITICS AS USUAL --CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN" will enable the unions to agressivly force people and companies to join against their free will.
I hope America opens its eyes --too many of our young over the generations fought and some gave all to preserve our basic freedoms.
Because the media and much of America are ENCHANTED with Obama a well planned and well funded plot by Soros and other hate America extremists are well under way.
Look at how many CZARS obama has put in place --even old Democratic Senator Byrd is concerned --bypassing the Legislative branch of Gov--Putting extreme power and money to the CZARS that answer only to the executive branch.
Radical Green Czar Van Jones resigned today because he could not deny the on FILM racist and extremist anti American views he holds. The most frightening part --the Media --who should be our watchdog of both Dems and REpubs --are reporting that Van Jones was forced out by the WACKY RIGHT ????

 

[dannyboy]

Dont forget, on Thursday our gooberment that cares so much for us, announced that they are looking at putting a ban on McDonald's from being able to have a restaurant within 1500 feet of a school. In the name of caring for our children's health. That after putting each one 30 grand in debt with that bail out scheme.

Damn, that equates mckydees with child molesters, beer joints, drug dealers etc in the eyes of our beloved gooberment.

But back to unionism being forced on the public, that should never happen. Just like buying a car. The public should have real choice, not to choose unionism or unionism.

When the teamsters offers real value to the people they are trying to organize, people will come. But currently, they have nothing of real value to offer, so forcing them in is the only way.

Our part time workforce is a shining example of where choice is king. Part timers in right to work states.....very very few belong to the union. Closed shop states, well they dont have a choice now do they?

d

 

[Mike23]

I'd rather be bullied by my union then by UPS. At least my union ATTEMPTS to protect me rather then UPS who would flush me down the toilet given the first chance. If it means I give up a small right to that protection, so be it, at least I'll still be employed with a decent wage instead of employed at $8 an hour.

 

[dannyboy]

Mike

Fedex is not union, and their wages are not that far below ours.

It is funny how those of you north of the border dont think twice about giving your personal freedoms away for some perceived security at the hands of the unions or governments.

After being at UPS 33 years, and to see what I have seen done by both the union and the company, Ill take my chances.

As I said, let the unions offer something of worth instead of forcing their will on the employees.

And for sure I will not ever trust a thing the gooberment is in support of.

d

 

[soberups]

This so called "employee free choice act" does not even give the employee that free choice. It is not only tilted toward the union, it gives them greater power and massive control over the whole process, and takes free choice away from those they seek to represent.

d

The "tilt" you speak of is actually back toward the middle, where it belongs.

The current system is heavily tilted in favor of the employer. Under the current system, the employer is free to utilize the same tactics that you accuse the union of wanting to use. Companies such as Wal-Mart spend millions of dollars a year to hire professional "union busting" consultants who are kept on retainer and will fly in at a moments notice to squash any attempt by the workers to organize.

Card check simply adds balance to a system that currently lacks it.

 

[dannyboy]

I disagree

The minute you take away the secret ballot, you take away freedoms.

d

 

[Dark_Team_135]

I disagree

The minute you take away the secret ballot, you take away freedoms.

d

Man this "secret ballot will be gone" myth is getting to union members as well as those of the general public that don't even bother to read what is really in a bill before deciding not to support it. Exactly what the republicans and their big business backers are counting on...

This bill will not eliminate the option of having a secret ballot election, if will only allow the EMPLOYEES to make the decision instead of MANAGEMENT. Under the current system only management reserves that right. So under the current system the secret ballot is already OPTIONAL. Where was all of the screaming about this fact when MANAGEMENT held all the cards?

The EFCA doesn't take away a secret ballot and it will not add anything to the process of getting cards signed by employees. It does curtail employer's ability to delay the election process for years while they harass, intimidate, threaten and ultimately fire union supporters with impunity as is the case under current labor law.

I will leave you with a couple of quotes from some less business leaning sources of information:

Media Matters: Wash. Times echoed opponents' distortion of EFCA in asserting it would "eliminate the secret ballot":

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) that Pelosi and Reid support does not eliminate employees' rights to a secret ballot. As The New York Times reported, "Business groups have attacked the legislation because it would take away employers' right to insist on holding a secret-ballot election to determine whether workers favored unionization" [emphasis added]. Moreover, supporters of the EFCA say employers often use the election process to delay, obstruct, and intimidate workers in an effort to resist organizing efforts.

The House Committee on Education and Labor has described the claim that "[t]he Employee Free Choice Act abolishes the National Labor Relations Board's 'secret ballot' election process" as a "myth" and stated on its website: "The Employee Free Choice Act would make that choice -- whether to use the NLRB election process or majority sign-up -- a majority choice of the employees, not the employer."


The American Prospect: Why We Need EFCA

Contrary to business propaganda, unions are good for the economy. A recent study by the nonprofit Economic Roundtable found that union workers in Los Angeles County earn 27 percent more than nonunion workers in the same job. The increased wages for the 800,000 union workers -- 17 percent of the labor force -- adds $7.2 billion a year in pay. As these workers spend their wages on food, clothing, child care, car and home repairs, and other items, their additional buying power creates 64,800 jobs and $11 billion in economic output. Many economists argue that any strategy Obama and Congress use to revitalize the economy should make higher wages -- and stronger unions -- a centerpiece.

 

[Jack4343]

I'd rather be bullied by my union then by UPS.

I'd rather not be bullied or forced by either. We need a secret ballot...period. Open signatures will definately encourage intimidation and it will happen. When a majority of workers vote to unionize via a secret ballot, it makes things on the level and legit.

It's not a secret that Unions are pro-Democratic overall and with the majority of the elected Government officials being Democrats, the unions are cashing in favors to get pro-union bills put through. Don't get me wrong. I'm happy to be a Teamster and grateful for what the union has provided for me. That being said, I don't have to agree with every issue the union pushes and this is one of them.

 

[dannyboy]

that choice -- whether to use the NLRB election process or majority sign-up -- a majority choice of the employees, not the employer."

I believe that while the language states that it will be the choice of the employees, it will be at the discretion of the union.

Instead, if you want real reform, allow the vote to take place within a couple of weeks instead of a month or so. But make sure it is always a secret ballot. Then I could support something like this.

The way it is written, there are too many loopholes that would force the employees to go along with the pathway the union decides is best.

d

 

[Count N Erdown]

Would'nt it be nice if everone read the bill before blowing off on what they heard through the grapevine! ???

 

[atatbl]

What a waste of bandwith. Almost a whole page of BS until one poster finally brought a FACT into one of Danny's threads. Ridiculous.

Hey Danny, how many stops do you average now a' days?

 

[Dark_Team_135]

I believe that while the language states that it will be the choice of the employees, it will be at the discretion of the union.

Instead, if you want real reform, allow the vote to take place within a couple of weeks instead of a month or so. But make sure it is always a secret ballot. Then I could support something like this.

The way it is written, there are too many loopholes that would force the employees to go along with the pathway the union decides is best.

d

I think that a much quicker election has to be included in any reform of labor laws in this country. Most Unions go for at least 60% of workers signing cards before turning them into management and many of them 75% or more just to have a chance to still have over 50% when the voting actually takes place! The sad fact is that a majority of workers say they would vote for a Union if given the chance, but employer intimidation and other tactics quickly cause many workers to change their minds after an organizing campaign has started.

Under the current system, it can take months to have the actual election and during that time workers are harassed, forced to attend "captive audience meetings", given one-on-one meetings with the boss, union supporters are fired (even though it's illegal), there are threats about closing the company (illegal again), the unit to be included is challenged and more "company friendly" workers are hired and on it goes. The Union isn't allowed to step foot on company property while the employers have access to employees every day! Much quicker elections would help this situation.

Even after the election this type of effort is continued by the company and they fight ever getting a 1st contract because the company knows after 12 months they can get the employees to decertify the union. Few groups of workers can endure these Union busting efforts by companies and their hired guns that can last over a year...

The other thing that must happen is there has to be some REAL penalties when employers commit Unfair Labor Practices before and after elections and during the duration of the employment relationship. These should include huge fines and even jail time for the offenders.

 

[dannyboy]

Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, whenever a petition shall have been filed by an employee or group of employees or any individual or labor organization acting in their behalf alleging that a majority of employees in a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining 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 as their bargaining representative and that no other individual or labor organization is currently certified or recognized as the exclusive representative of any of the employees in the unit, the Board shall not direct an election but shall certify the individual or labor organization as the representative described in subsection (a).

There you have it. Word for word, from your link.

As long as they have intimidated 50% of the workforce into signing the cards, the board will certify it as the Representative of the workers, without a secret ballot being offered.

I know that the truth is hard for you back biters to understand, but there it is.

Its the end run around what the employees want, only what the union wants.

No where else in the bill does it say that the secret ballot remains, only that the union does not have to worry about it anymore, they have the short cut to the finish line.

d​

​

​

​

​

 

[pretzel_man]

Man this "secret ballot will be gone" myth is getting to union members as well as those of the general public that don't even bother to read what is really in a bill before deciding not to support it. Exactly what the republicans and their big business backers are counting on...

This bill will not eliminate the option of having a secret ballot election, if will only allow the EMPLOYEES to make the decision instead of MANAGEMENT. Under the current system only management reserves that right. So under the current system the secret ballot is already OPTIONAL. Where was all of the screaming about this fact when MANAGEMENT held all the cards?

The EFCA doesn't take away a secret ballot and it will not add anything to the process of getting cards signed by employees. It does curtail employer's ability to delay the election process for years while they harass, intimidate, threaten and ultimately fire union supporters with impunity as is the case under current labor law.

I will leave you with a couple of quotes from some less business leaning sources of information:

Media Matters: Wash. Times echoed opponents' distortion of EFCA in asserting it would "eliminate the secret ballot":

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) that Pelosi and Reid support does not eliminate employees' rights to a secret ballot. As The New York Times reported, "Business groups have attacked the legislation because it would take away employers' right to insist on holding a secret-ballot election to determine whether workers favored unionization" [emphasis added]. Moreover, supporters of the EFCA say employers often use the election process to delay, obstruct, and intimidate workers in an effort to resist organizing efforts.

The House Committee on Education and Labor has described the claim that "[t]he Employee Free Choice Act abolishes the National Labor Relations Board's 'secret ballot' election process" as a "myth" and stated on its website: "The Employee Free Choice Act would make that choice -- whether to use the NLRB election process or majority sign-up -- a majority choice of the employees, not the employer."


The American Prospect: Why We Need EFCA

Contrary to business propaganda, unions are good for the economy. A recent study by the nonprofit Economic Roundtable found that union workers in Los Angeles County earn 27 percent more than nonunion workers in the same job. The increased wages for the 800,000 union workers -- 17 percent of the labor force -- adds $7.2 billion a year in pay. As these workers spend their wages on food, clothing, child care, car and home repairs, and other items, their additional buying power creates 64,800 jobs and $11 billion in economic output. Many economists argue that any strategy Obama and Congress use to revitalize the economy should make higher wages -- and stronger unions -- a centerpiece.

What does this wording from the act mean? I was under the impression that this means that an open petition can certify a union instead of a secret ballot. I'm personally all for the union's ability to organize employees. I really am. I just believe it should be through secret ballot. Why is that unfair to the union?

‘‘(6) Notwithstanding any other provision of this sec
6​

tion, whenever a petition shall have been filed by an em
ployee or group of employees or any individual or labor​

8
organization acting in their behalf alleging that a majority​

9
of employees in a unit appropriate for the purposes of col10​

lective bargaining wish to be represented by an individual
11
or labor organization for such purposes, the Board shall​

12
investigate the petition. If the Board finds that a majority​

13
of the employees in a unit appropriate for bargaining has​

14
signed valid authorizations designating the individual or​

15
labor organization specified in the petition as their bar16​

gaining representative and that no other individual or
17
labor organization is currently certified or recognized as​

18
the exclusive representative of any of the employees in the​

19
unit, the Board shall not direct an election but shall certify​

20
the individual or labor organization as the representative​

21
described in subsection (a).​

 

[Mike23]

Mike

Fedex is not union, and their wages are not that far below ours.

It is funny how those of you north of the border dont think twice about giving your personal freedoms away for some perceived security at the hands of the unions or governments.

After being at UPS 33 years, and to see what I have seen done by both the union and the company, Ill take my chances.

As I said, let the unions offer something of worth instead of forcing their will on the employees.

And for sure I will not ever trust a thing the gooberment is in support of.

d

33 years of being union? That's a long time to lose touch with the real world of nonunion workers. Maybe you should try getting another job and see how long they put up with the stuff that the union attempts to protect us from.

You don't think walmart employees would like a union so they make more then $8 an hour? Or what about the cashier at the mall? If you don't like the union and not willing to make a few sacrifices for protection then go work one of those jobs where you have 0 protection.

My previous job, I phoned in sick 2 hours (UPS contract states I only need an hour) before my shift. I had bad food poisoning (as both a blood test and urine test proved later). I was told to either show up to my shift or I would be terminated. The reason for the termination? 'Employee did not fulfill expectations'. I went to work and still got termed later for it.

Yes, I will give up some of my 'rights' for the protection of my union. All I need now is a doctors note and nobody says boo about it. There are LOTS of politics that I find stupid with this job but at least there ARE politics. A nonunion job, there's no politics. You screw up, you're fired. Have a nice life.

Also don't lump in all Canadians with myself. It's my personal belief and mine alone.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

d,

33 years of being union.... or 33 years of paying union dues....

Big Difference.




-Bug-

 

[brett636]

I also disagree with this EFCA bill. As danny said force a secret ballot election sooner than 90 days, or require a secret ballot no matter what, but don't eliminate it. Depending on the business it would not be hard to find 50% of the workers who would rather "go with the flow" and sign the cards. They should have the right to go behind a curtain and vote their beliefs without another human being ever knowing how they voted.

As far as the fedex situation goes, I don't see this as necessary to unionize fedex. Get their RLA status changed and their goose is a good as cooked IMHO. If they treat their employees right they won't vote in a union. Fedex just needs to be on the same playing field as us.

 

[705red]

http://www.teamster.org/content/Happy%20Labor%20Day


Its funny that no one is complaining about the current system that allows management the upper hand. I am a volunteer organizer and I respect peoples rights on to join or not to. At no time have I ever intimidated anyone during organizing drives nor have anyone affiliated with my local.

Im glad that people that have made it to retirement with the help of the union, who now enjoy a pension and medical provided from a union think that the unions are not needed!

 

[Jones]

Maybe Labor Day should be replaced by a new holiday to celebrate the tiny number of brilliant investors who, more or less single-handedly, are responsible for long-term economic progress. We should abolish Labor Day and replace it with Capital Day – a festive time when we, the majority of parasitic wealth destroyers whose income comes from wages rather than investments, can give our collective thanks to the small number of people who have most of the money.