Republicans Thwart Union in Tennesse

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

berzerker60

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2012
1,233
1
0
I'm sorry, but your thoughts regarding the UAW are very naïve. The UAW is not a democracy, it's run like a dictatorship. If the International offices of the UAW based in Detroit want a plant to strike, that plant will strike. A vote will be held, but the workforce will be wound up by the guys from Detroit until they're convinced they want to strike. And guess who counts the votes? If the vote count doesn't come out the way they want it, they'll make it come out the way they want it. (And I have a story to back this up too.) The head of the UAW is appointed in a sham election process. Delegates to the convention that elect the top dog are separated when they arrive into groups, are taken into closed rooms and are told for whom to cast their vote. They are told the consequence of not complying.

A strike can be used to affect an operation hundreds or thousands of miles away and even in another country. You've got a key plant that supplies a component that keeps four other plants running and you're trying to get concessions from the company, you put out the plant that makes that component. Those people walk the picket line, taking it in the ass to get something for another group of people that might not even work for the same company.

A portion of the dues paid go to UAW HQ in Detroit. How would those people get paid? How would they afford the costs of the building they operate from? A portion of union dues go to support candidates that the poor schmuck at the bottom of the ladder might not support. Every election we would get the list of 'endorsed' candidates we should vote for.

I could go on and on with this.

I don't pretend to know the full story of UAW politics down the line, but I was a UAW member as a grad student in the UC system, and they never had shit to do with us. If you seriously think people can just be "wound up to vote" however someone wants with no problem, you don't have any faith in democracy to start with, so there's not a lot to be gained by democratic institutions, no. I also don't really care who runs the UAW, because it never impacted us. I just know the union was sometimes a pain in the ass, but left us WAY better off than non-union grad students around the country in lots of ways.

Of course, my anecdote certainly doesn't speak to what has to be the case in Tennessee. I'm just saying I'd be surprised if the locals couldn't work out a deal where it's called UAW but really in name only. If that's wrong, then I'm all for a local union. I care about them being unionized, don't care one bit how that happens.
 
Last edited:

WackyDan

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
4,794
68
91
Interesting side note. Least my understanding of labor laws.

You can't start a net new union in the U.S. - If you unionize you have to bring in and join an existing union. Unions lobbied for this law - go figure. It allows them to grow larger and for union management to grow their fiefdoms while commanding excellent union leadership salaries for all that check writing of political donations they give made up of union dues.

Ironically, I would have loved the VW plant to unionize but by bringing in the plumbers union or something of the sort. I think that would have been hysterical.
 

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
You can't start a net new union in the U.S. - If you unionize you have to bring in and join an existing union. Unions lobbied for this law - go figure.
Really?? That's freaking amazing.

If true (not doubting you, just I can hardly believe that) it just goes to show how in bed with corrupt political hacks the unions are. That sort of power is almost like a 4th branch of govt. Under what logical authority should they (or some law they got their cronies to pass) be able to dictate no one else can start a new union?
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Interesting side note. Least my understanding of labor laws.

You can't start a net new union in the U.S. - If you unionize you have to bring in and join an existing union. Unions lobbied for this law - go figure. It allows them to grow larger and for union management to grow their fiefdoms while commanding excellent union leadership salaries for all that check writing of political donations they give made up of union dues.

Ironically, I would have loved the VW plant to unionize but by bringing in the plumbers union or something of the sort. I think that would have been hysterical.
LOL I did not know that, but it's not surprising.

Both electrical (IBEW 175) and plumbers/steamfitters (UA Local 43) are strong in Chattanooga. Both are well-run. IBEW 175 no doubt has some members in good standing working at VW and perhaps UA 43 as well. Ironworkers and millwrights used to have locals as well, but I suspect the loss of heavy manufacturing did them in.
 

compuwiz1

Admin Emeritus Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
27,112
930
126
Good. Unions tie the hands of too many businesses that could do a much better job without them. Most, not all, unions are bad for the country and why even American car manufacturers build cars in countries where the labor is cheaper. Hell, even the 6 speed Ford Mustang transmission is made in China. Thanks unions!
 
Last edited:

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Good. Unions tie the hands of too many businesses that could do a much better job without them. Most, not all, unions are bad for the country and why even American car manufacturers build cars in countries where the labor is cheaper. Hell, even the 6 speed Ford Mustang transmission is made in China. Thanks unions!

Yes, because if it wasn't for Unions, labor would be cheaper in US than China. :rolleyes:
I didn't know Mustang transmission was made in China, that pretty much takes it off my list of desirable cars.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,393
16,791
136
Interesting side note. Least my understanding of labor laws.

You can't start a net new union in the U.S. - If you unionize you have to bring in and join an existing union. Unions lobbied for this law - go figure. It allows them to grow larger and for union management to grow their fiefdoms while commanding excellent union leadership salaries for all that check writing of political donations they give made up of union dues.

Ironically, I would have loved the VW plant to unionize but by bringing in the plumbers union or something of the sort. I think that would have been hysterical.

Uh what?

According to wiki that's not true:
http://m.wikihow.com/Create-a-Union-at-Work
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Last edited:

berzerker60

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2012
1,233
1
0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9MpzCx5968

:)

My understanding is creating a new union is so onerous it is not a practical option - in other words it doesn't matter if it's legal or not, if you want to form a union you must join up with an existing union. Whether you want to blame the process on existing unions or anti-union people, be my guest which you choose.

I would bet the NRLB would be all too happy to help you with legal questions if you wanted to know more about creating a union. http://www.nlrb.gov/

Specifically: http://www.nlrb.gov/what-we-do/conduct-elections
If you wish to form or join a union, or decertify an existing union, you may file an election petition. Please contact an information officer at your nearest Regional Office for assistance.
To start the election process, a petition must be filed with the nearest NLRB Regional Office showing interest in the union from at least 30% of employees. NLRB agents will then investigate to make sure the Board has jurisdiction, the union is qualified, and there are no existing labor contracts that would bar an election.
...
Alternate path to union representation
In addition to NLRB-conducted elections, federal law provides employees a second path to choose a representative: They may persuade an employer to voluntarily recognize a union after showing majority support by signed authorization cards or other means. These agreements are made outside the NLRB process. If a union is voluntarily recognized, its status as bargaining representative cannot be challenged during a reasonable period for bargaining, which the Board defines as not less than six months (and not more than one year) after the parties’ first bargaining session.
I'd wager the biggest obstacle to overcome in starting a union is FUD spread by anti-union bosses. The amount of companies that flagrantly violate labor law in this country is staggering, but no one knows about their rights to even get particularly upset about things like unpaid overtime (wage theft), unpaid internships, and illegal forms of anti-union activity.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,001
571
126
BMW management wanted a UNION and Republican politicians objected. Republicans threatened, lied and intimidated auto workers into voting no. Republicans would rather have NO jobs than UNION jobs, friggin Republicans....

BIZARRO.....



http://theweek.com/article/index/256496/the-tennessee-gops-union-thwarting-push-has-backfired

Another point of view:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/371318/why-card-check-matters-chattanooga-edition-alec-torres

On Friday, workers in a Volkswagen plant in Chattanooga, Tenn., voted in a secret ballot to reject joining the United Autoworkers Union (UAW), which had for months claimed that it had public attestations from a majority of workers that they wanted to unionize.

Under current labor laws, workers can unionize two ways: directly via card check, or through a secret ballot. The unionization process begins with union officials or workers trying to get members of the bargaining unit at the firm to sign their names on cards affirming their desire to unionize, a public process. If 30 percent of the workforce signs the cards, an election can go ahead, but if a majority have signed, the employer can choose to recognize the union, and it’s formed without a secret ballot. If the employer declines or the card process won between 30 and 50 percent support, a secret ballot election is held that requires majority support.

Advertisement
Under so-called card-check legislation that Democrats have tried to push through Congress in recent years, 50 percent of the workforce having signed a card would automatically create a union without a secret ballot — regardless of the employer’s wishes.
Because of allegations that the UAW was intimidating workers into signing cards, VW asked that a secret ballot be held. Under the “card check” regime labor advocates envision, in other words, if the UAW had been right that the majority of workers had signed cards, the unionization that failed on a secret ballot would have gone ahead.

In September, Gary Casteel, the director of the UAW in Tennessee, claimed that the UAW had cards signed by the 2,400 workers at the Chattanooga Volkswagen plant. The UAW said it wished to certify the union based on the alleged majority of signatures obtained via card check, saying that a secret ballot vote following the card process would be too “divisive.” Such a process could only go forward if Volkswagen, the employer, agreed to it.

However, before the card-check procedure could be completed, eight Volkswagen workers filed charges against the UAW with the help of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, claiming that the union’s card-check drive was misleading and coercive.

In the employees’ affidavits obtained by National Review Online, the employees said that the UAW “solicited, enticed, and/or demanded VW employees’ signatures by unlawful means including misrepresentations, coercion, threats, and promises.” In one instance, union officials allegedly offered free tickets to a nearby amusement park to one employee and his entire family if he signed the card.

The eight workers contacted the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, which helped them draft their affidavits, in mid October 2013, the same time employees within the Chattanooga plant began circulating an anti-union petition that reached 611 signatures by October 25.

Following the filing of the charges and the petition, the Volkswagen board of the Chattanooga plant said on February 3 it wanted to hold secret-ballot elections, against the UAW’s initial wishes.

“We don’t know why exactly Volkswagen decided to have a secret ballot, but we think the board of Volkswagen agreed with the UAW behind the scenes, perhaps relying on the UAW’s assertions that they had enough votes,” Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation tells NRO.

Previous collusion between Volkswagen and the UAW led Mix and workers opposed to unionization to believe that VW and the UAW were working together to unionize the workers.

VW had welcomed UAW representatives to the Chattanooga plant speak to employees in the factory over the course of the unionization effort, and a “neutrality agreement” signed between VW and the UAW on January 27 — only 18 days before the February 14 election — stipulated that they would work enhance “VW’s cost advantage,” or work together to keep employee wages and benefits low enough for production costs to remain competitive. Furthermore, Volkswagen directors had allegedly indicated that they would not expand the Chattanooga facility and would withhold beginning production of a new SUV platform from the plant if the workers did not unionize.

In VW’s home country of Germany, union representatives have seats on the Volkswagen board of directors. The company seems to have pro-union sympathies that may have influenced VW’s actions in Chattanooga, Mix says.​

But the workers’ protests that they’d been intimidated forced VW to grant them the protection of a secret ballot. “I think that if those eight employees hadn’t filed charges, the card check might have worked,” Mix says. “To this day, nobody has seen the ‘majority’ of cards the UAW claimed to have.”

When the vote finally came, workers rejected the UAW’s attempt to unionize by 53–47 margin, 712 votes to 626.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
Um ... the chief executive of the plant said he was lying.

Not sure if his original statement was correct but I would bet dollars to donuts that his last one was. The plant manager definitely doesn't decide what line of vehicles are made at the plant he manages.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Not sure if his original statement was correct but I would bet dollars to donuts that his last one was. The plant manager definitely doesn't decide what line of vehicles are made at the plant he manages.

Senator Corker does.
 

Daverino

Platinum Member
Mar 15, 2007
2,004
1
0
I'd like to point out, without a trace of irony, that 'Joe the Plumber' Wurzelbacher is now a proud member of the UAW.
 

MagickMan

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2008
7,460
3
76
Senator Corker does.

In a noon interview today he said he'd talked with the head of VW NA, that's where he received his info. That's plausible, but if true that's very indiscreet of him and will hurt him down the road when he wants info on anything else.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
In a noon interview today he said he'd talked with the head of VW NA, that's where he received his info. That's plausible, but if true that's very indiscreet of him and will hurt him down the road when he wants info on anything else.
If this is true, then it appears that Corker was doing everything possible to get those jobs for his State...and he had to throw the UAW under the bus to get it done. The way Dems framed this was interesting though. I believe that VW had another plant in the US (PA) they had to shut down several years ago citing inability to compete globally due to high union labor costs. I imagine there's more to this story than meets the eye.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,393
16,791
136

If true then it looks like the right outcome happened.

My personal experience with unions was that a union representative came into our non union workplace and handed out cards telling us that if we filled them out we would receive more info about the union. That's not what these cards were at all.

After the company became unionized we went from being the highest paid employees in the industry to one of the lowest paid. The pay cut was about a 30% cut in pay.

My personal experience has yet to see a single positive thing come from being in a union. However I still view them as a necessary evil when dealing with large corporations who see employees no differently than a paper clip, easily replaced, always looking for a cheaper way to obtain them, and always pushing/testing the limit of their capability.

Hopefully the VW employees, if they want will form a new union and work with VW like their German counterparts.
 

l33tFuzzyLogic

Junior Member
Feb 18, 2014
12
0
0
Unions existed because you either worked at the local steel mill...or you farmed. (exaggerating on the only two options, but hopefully you get the point).

Today, if you don't like the way Walmart is treating you....there is most likely a Target within 2 miles.

These options were not available way back when Unions were created. ...and when there was such a monopoly on human resources...yes, corruption was MUCH easier....thus, Unions were created. Supply and demand on where you can work is MUCH different now. There is very little need for Unions.

And to think about Government Unions just boggles my mind. Who are they protecting against? The Government itself...that's who. Scary.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,018
37
91
Pretty much all the UAW guys I know are proud that they're union, but can't F'ing stand the BS that is the UAW. Problem really is membership: There are so many people that think for today at the expense of tomorrow, they'll keep taking scraps and let International continue the f*cking and fleecing. They'd be far better off becoming the NAUAW or USUAW. Negotiate contracts per company all at once for all the locations. Need to strike? Cool. All locations for that company go on strike. Which brings us back to membership issues...no one wants to do the short term pain for long term gain.
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,195
857
126
They are all for the free market except when they aren't.
Delusional much? The workers rejected unionization, some idiot tries to misconstrue it as the Republicans forcing them to, and then you drink the Kool-aid. I heard from one on the radio personally explaining his decision. It may shock you to know that the people in that area *gasp* agree with the politicians they elected! Also, he wasn't implying that he, Republicans, or government was making those decisions, he was saying that the real decision-makers in the company far away considered more than any employee making such claims locally would know. These subsidies and the decisions made by private companies are negotiations and both parties keep their cards and true motivations close to their chests.