Employee Free Choice Act (H.R. 800)

[synapsetx]

This goes along with the rule of "whatever the title of the bill is, it really does the exact opposite".

Example: PATRIOT act, certainly wasn't patriotic and betrayed the founding concepts of the constitution.

 

[LumbergTech]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
It has nothing to do with free choice.

It is about the Democrats paying back the unions for all their support. Think we have unemployment problems now let's increase the number of people working who are in unions and watch unemployment sky rocket. Companies will be far less likely to high new people due to the difficulty in getting rid of them.

Pretty much. Free choice my ass, if i can't vote secretly it's got NOTHING to do with freedom.

How would you feel if for presidential election you had to say who you're voting for in front of the whole line?

wouldn't bother me at all, although i dont think that it should be required for obvious reasons

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: LumbergTech

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
It has nothing to do with free choice.

It is about the Democrats paying back the unions for all their support. Think we have unemployment problems now let's increase the number of people working who are in unions and watch unemployment sky rocket. Companies will be far less likely to high new people due to the difficulty in getting rid of them.

Pretty much. Free choice my ass, if i can't vote secretly it's got NOTHING to do with freedom.

How would you feel if for presidential election you had to say who you're voting for in front of the whole line?

wouldn't bother me at all, although i dont think that it should be required for obvious reasons

If you shouldn't be required to announce to everyone who you vote for in a presidential election, why should another election be so different?

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
It has nothing to do with free choice.

It is about the Democrats paying back the unions for all their support. Think we have unemployment problems now let's increase the number of people working who are in unions and watch unemployment sky rocket. Companies will be far less likely to high new people due to the difficulty in getting rid of them.

union membership is not the problem. The US already has one of the lowest rates of union membership in the industrialized world. Those unionized countries are out-competing us.

Didnt I read somewhere that the US had the highest production rates?

HC is the thorn.

american productivity is roughly equal to major industrialized nations, ie Germany, japan, france, etc.

 

[miketheidiot]

for the record i am against this, because i believe it will hurt unions more than help them.

 

[LumbergTech]

Originally posted by: dphantom
It removes the secret ballot.

"`(6) 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)."


It also gives any one person immense power to petition to form a union. Also, since the formation of a union could now be done by simply signing a form, peer pressure can be brought to bear on those who may not want to sign. So people could be forced into a union who do not want to be there.

The secret ballot is a foundation of democracy. This is a Union driven bill in an attempt to ensure that a democratic vote using a secret ballot is eliminated from the workplace. It is an effort to grow unions when their utility is becoming increasingly marginalized.

explain that to me...

they can be forced to?

so they arent forced to work for the employer when the employer makes what they consider to be unreasonable demands..but they are forced by a union to participate in what they consider to be an unreasonable organization?

im not actually supporting this, i just don't really see the problem

 

[trenchfoot]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
for the record i am against this, because i believe it will hurt unions more than help them.

Very much so, and I'm speaking as a member of a Union Bargaining Committie.

And, for the umpteenth time, "Unions would not exist if they were not needed."

Example: I have been in dispute and grievance meetings with middle management types so many times where they do not know their own Bargaining Agreement that their own bosses signed off on and go off on their own little power trips and make up their own rules about how personnel disputes and grievances should be handled. They will invariably resort to threats, intimidation and finally retaliation when they are put in their place. If the Union wasn't there to represent those workers who would otherwise have to put up with that kind of treatment, they'd then have to turn to a Labor Board that is more than likely staffed with management friendly arbitrators.

There still is a need, therefore, the Unions still exsit.

Simple, really.

 

[Ferocious]

Misconceptions abound with this one. Wow.

Card check has already existed for years!! It is already possible to vote in a union without a secret ballot election.

Currently either the workers or the employer can request a secret ballot election. This new law would remove the right of employers to demand one. The workers would still retain that right with a request from 30% of the employees.

The Card Check legislation will NOT PASS The truth is, labor will settle for a system that is fair. When a secret election is called for, the election should be held quickly like within 5-10 days. Not many months later which allows the company to wage an intimidation campaign. Canada has a rule where most elections are held within a week.

For decades either a GOP President or a GOP Congress has virtually crippled the NLRB. So what unions want now is a permanent fix around those political games. Either card check...or a rule requiring an election be held in a timely manner. The latter will be the outcome IMO.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
It has nothing to do with free choice.

It is about the Democrats paying back the unions for all their support. Think we have unemployment problems now let's increase the number of people working who are in unions and watch unemployment sky rocket. Companies will be far less likely to high new people due to the difficulty in getting rid of them.

union membership is not the problem. The US already has one of the lowest rates of union membership in the industrialized world. Those unionized countries are out-competing us.

Didnt I read somewhere that the US had the highest production rates?

HC is the thorn.

american productivity is roughly equal to major industrialized nations, ie Germany, japan, france, etc.

How is that possible? Our economy is roughly the same size as the EU, except the EU has roughly 50% more population. 450 vs 300 million. Our productivity is the highest in the world on a per capita basis.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: dphantom
It removes the secret ballot.

"`(6) 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)."


It also gives any one person immense power to petition to form a union. Also, since the formation of a union could now be done by simply signing a form, peer pressure can be brought to bear on those who may not want to sign. So people could be forced into a union who do not want to be there.

The secret ballot is a foundation of democracy. This is a Union driven bill in an attempt to ensure that a democratic vote using a secret ballot is eliminated from the workplace. It is an effort to grow unions when their utility is becoming increasingly marginalized.

But why are unions marginalized? Could it be because they workers are expected to be competitive with people making $1/hour or less?

It's called competition. Business deals with it every day. If a company produces a widget that is of poor quality and is overpriced, it won't stay in business long.

If the cost of labor to produce a widget plus transportation, energy and other costs is less than a US unionized worker to produce and is of equal or better quality, then the job should go to where it can be produced at the lowest cost. If that is overseas so be it. If that is from a union shop to a non-union shop, same thing.

Unions have had a very valuable place in protecting workers. But when a union prices its members out of the market, then the union has done no union member any favors.

Then move the whole plant overseas to where the cheap labor is and take all the management/indirect jobs with them. That would be more COMPETITIVE..... or do you believe that only labor has to be competitive against cheap foreign labor??

I'm getting a little sick of all the management friendly types (brown-nosers) acting like blue collar workers are 3rd rate citizens. If you like cheap labor then be so kind as to put your mouth where your money is and move there.

 

[PokerGuy]

A secret ballot is critical to the existence of any kind of election free from undue pressure, no matter which side you're on. Lets say you vote for "no union". If a union does come, you'd better believe you're going to be facing retribution. Lets say you vote "yes" to a union, and the union does not get voted in. You'd better believe management will remember that and make sure the troublemaker is one of the first removed from the workforce when layoffs happen.

The unions are pushing hard for this because they know their relevance in the modern society is disappearing. The only way they can continue to exist is by using pressure tactics. It's actually very very similar to the RIAA. Their "business model" is broken, they are relics of another era, and now they want to create new legislation to help them hang on to their position.

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
Then move the whole plant overseas to where the cheap labor is and take all the management/indirect jobs with them. That would be more COMPETITIVE..... or do you believe that only labor has to be competitive against cheap foreign labor??

Huh? You don't think that's already happening? Of course it is.

Unions artificially drive up the price of production, which makes companies less competitive than those not encumbered by the unnecesarry expenses. That's why unions thrive in environments where the employer does not have to be very competitive -- governments, public school systems etc.

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: dphantom
It removes the secret ballot.

"`(6) 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)."


It also gives any one person immense power to petition to form a union. Also, since the formation of a union could now be done by simply signing a form, peer pressure can be brought to bear on those who may not want to sign. So people could be forced into a union who do not want to be there.

The secret ballot is a foundation of democracy. This is a Union driven bill in an attempt to ensure that a democratic vote using a secret ballot is eliminated from the workplace. It is an effort to grow unions when their utility is becoming increasingly marginalized.

But why are unions marginalized? Could it be because they workers are expected to be competitive with people making $1/hour or less?

It's called competition. Business deals with it every day. If a company produces a widget that is of poor quality and is overpriced, it won't stay in business long.

If the cost of labor to produce a widget plus transportation, energy and other costs is less than a US unionized worker to produce and is of equal or better quality, then the job should go to where it can be produced at the lowest cost. If that is overseas so be it. If that is from a union shop to a non-union shop, same thing.

Unions have had a very valuable place in protecting workers. But when a union prices its members out of the market, then the union has done no union member any favors.

Then move the whole plant overseas to where the cheap labor is and take all the management/indirect jobs with them. That would be more COMPETITIVE..... or do you believe that only labor has to be competitive against cheap foreign labor??

I'm getting a little sick of all the management friendly types (brown-nosers) acting like blue collar workers are 3rd rate citizens. If you like cheap labor then be so kind as to put your mouth where your money is and move there.

I don't have to because I maintain my skills and productivity at a level that outcompetes any outsourced overseas job. As for moving everything, if that makes the company more competitive then by all means do so. I have no problems with that at all.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: dphantom
It removes the secret ballot.

"`(6) 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)."


It also gives any one person immense power to petition to form a union. Also, since the formation of a union could now be done by simply signing a form, peer pressure can be brought to bear on those who may not want to sign. So people could be forced into a union who do not want to be there.

The secret ballot is a foundation of democracy. This is a Union driven bill in an attempt to ensure that a democratic vote using a secret ballot is eliminated from the workplace. It is an effort to grow unions when their utility is becoming increasingly marginalized.

But why are unions marginalized? Could it be because they workers are expected to be competitive with people making $1/hour or less?

It's called competition. Business deals with it every day. If a company produces a widget that is of poor quality and is overpriced, it won't stay in business long.

If the cost of labor to produce a widget plus transportation, energy and other costs is less than a US unionized worker to produce and is of equal or better quality, then the job should go to where it can be produced at the lowest cost. If that is overseas so be it. If that is from a union shop to a non-union shop, same thing.

Unions have had a very valuable place in protecting workers. But when a union prices its members out of the market, then the union has done no union member any favors.

Then move the whole plant overseas to where the cheap labor is and take all the management/indirect jobs with them. That would be more COMPETITIVE..... or do you believe that only labor has to be competitive against cheap foreign labor??

I'm getting a little sick of all the management friendly types (brown-nosers) acting like blue collar workers are 3rd rate citizens. If you like cheap labor then be so kind as to put your mouth where your money is and move there.

I don't have to because I maintain my skills and productivity at a level that outcompetes any outsourced overseas job. As for moving everything, if that makes the company more competitive then by all means do so. I have no problems with that at all.

In other words as long as this country allows our blue collar jobs to be outsourced to places with $1/hr wages you can continueto live in your little dream world where you think your better then everybody else. But don't farm out the white collar jobs, they have skillz!!!

LOL@U

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

In other words as long as this country allows our blue collar jobs to be outsourced to places with $1/hr wages you can continueto live in your little dream world where you think your better then everybody else. But don't farm out the white collar jobs, they have skillz!!!

LOL@U

I think you need to learn how to read. I was quite clear. I have no issue with outsourcing white or blue collar jobs if the company finds it is more competitive when it does so. I said nnothing about being any better or any worse than anyone else.

I have skills. I worked long and hard to gain them and work harder to maintain them so I don't get outsourced. If you either do not have the skills or don't want to put the effort into acquiring and maintaining them, then you or those like you will end being outsourced.