Card Check, the good, bad, and ugly

dannyboy

From the promised LAND
Bug

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

Big Difference.
I did both. With the exception of being to think for myself......So explain the big difference......

705

Again, please read my posts again. I am not against unions being able to organize a company. Currently, there are a lot of things that are not right with the system. Part of it is the fault of the unions, others the fault of big business.

But the bottom line is that the employee should be given the right to a private ballot, one that neither the company or the union knows how they vote. Any other system would leave the whole process ripe for fraud on either side.

Now, push forward a bill that would allow a secret ballot within a month or even two weeks of trying to organize a company, and I will support that whole heartedly.

But to take the right of secret ballot away from the employee, that is wrong.

Mike

$8 an hour at Walmart? Maybe in Canada, but in the states only if you just started. The ones I have delivered to make 12-15 an hour if they have been there a while and work hard.

But maybe you want them to get paid as much as you?

d
 

Dark_Team_135

Well-Known Member
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

DB,

The thing is that this bill isn't the whole text of the NLRA. It only changes the sections that it refers to. The rest of the text of the NLRA remains. Therefore if as few as 30% of the employees sign a petition asking for an election, they will get one. This is true if the union can't get at least 50% + 1 of the members to sign cards in favor of the union there will still be a secret ballot election.

The difference is that now the employer doesn't get to make this call as they were able to before even if 100% of the employees signed cards.

BTW, card-check or majority sign-up has been in the NLRA since it started in 1935 but the employer has to agree for it to be used. And it has been many times in the past.

Also, since you seem to be so hell bent on secret ballots being used to form Unions, how do you feel about them NOT being required to decertify Unions under current law?

Under current law, no election is necessary to disband a union. The Employee Free Choice Act would not change this. Under current law, if an employer has evidence, such as cards or a petition, that a majority of workers no longer supports the union, then the employer is required by law to withdraw recognition of the union and stop bargaining, without an election, unless the employer files for an election.

Just wondering....

The full text of the NLRA is here:

http://www.nlrb.gov/
 

dannyboy

From the promised LAND
Its simple really.

Any new "adjustment" to the law the way it is has to be specific in nature.

The way this law is written, it is too liberal with the card check and never mentions the rights of the employees, only the union.

As for de-certifying a union via the same way, I totally support secret ballots, on both ends of the process.

As I said, when you remove the secret ballot, that leaves the whole process ripe for manipulation by either party.

I do find your allegation of an employer simply not recognizing the union and refusing to bargain interesting.

d
 

Mr.Brown

Active Member
I called in to work at ups one time, and was fired thanks to he union I bot my job back the next day , I love payed holidays.
 

Dark_Team_135

Well-Known Member
Its simple really.

Any new "adjustment" to the law the way it is has to be specific in nature.

The way this law is written, it is too liberal with the card check and never mentions the rights of the employees, only the union.

d

I agree that there should be more clarity in that secret ballots are still available for employees so it would take away a major talking point for opponents of the EFCA.

In my opinion, the majority sign-up part of this bill will not survive in it's current form. However, if the rest of it remains mostly intact, it will still be a much needed step towards a balancing of power between management and labor that is long over do.
 

Brown Rocket

Well-Known Member
Three months ago I was ready to withdraw from the Union (right to work states are great) but then our center manager was fired and we got a real head hunter. I stayed in to see how it would play out. Whether I would need the union or not. Three months later I am a volunteer organizer because I saw first hand what could happen even with the union.

I haven't seen any intimidation while organizing. "Want the union?" "No." "can we come back again some other time to see if you have changed your mind?" "NO!" "bye" Give them a big old 5 and put don't contact again on the form.

If you lie or intimidate when it comes time to vote they wont. And like you said, they'll back out later on then what do you have? So I see no difference in changing this.
 
Intimidation is attending my very first union meeting and having a union jerk pull out a gun. First and last meeting! This is part of what I got for my dues yet, people say they have no idea what your talking about when you mention union "goons".
 

over9five

Moderator
Staff member
Intimidation is attending my very first union meeting and having a union jerk pull out a gun. First and last meeting! This is part of what I got for my dues yet, people say they have no idea what your talking about when you mention union "goons".

I think we need "the REST of the story"!
 

JonFrum

Member
Dark_Team_135 said:
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.
- - -
The EFCA doesn't take away a secret ballot . . .
- - -
Therefore if as few as 30% of the employees sign a petition asking for an election, they will get one. This is true if the union can't get at least 50% + 1 of the members to sign cards in favor of the union there will still be a secret ballot election. The difference is that now the employer doesn't get to make this call as they were able to before even if 100% of the employees signed cards.
- - -
Under current law, no election is necessary to disband a union. The Employee Free Choice Act would not change this. Under current law, if an employer has evidence, such as cards or a petition, that a majority of workers no longer supports the union, then the employer is required by law to withdraw recognition of the union and stop bargaining, without an election, unless the employer files for an election.
If anyone else finds the above exerpts false or misleading, you can learn more here . . .
http://www.uschamber.com/issues/index/labor/cardchecksecrbal.htm

The 17 myths of Card Check are debunked here . . .
http://www.uschamber.com/wfi/myths.htm
 

dannyboy

From the promised LAND
Jon

Why should we bother with things like the truth, when we can spread rumors and call them the truth.

Unions are not interested in you or I, they are interested in numbers. The minute you become too expensive to represent, you are gone. Yeah I know, there are always an exception or two, but they are interested in numbers. The more the merrier.

I have seen a good number of grievances buried because the union has an alternative plan, and the grievances would either upset the plan, or open up the serious faults in the contract that they want to keep quiet.

d
 
Top