The Employee Free Choice Act is DOOMED*

[Atreus21]

3) REPLACE the card check with something to fight the "nuclear" option, which Walmart is so notorious for - closing the store as a direct punishment and "containment strategy" if it dares to unionize.

In other words, force Wal-mart to run its business contrary to its own self-interest? That's quite socialistic.

 

[quest55720]

I am glad this will be killed. The last thing I want is some union thug trying to persuade me. My employer like most treats me pretty damn good. I don't want to be giving money to some crappy union so they can take vacations to 400 dollar a night hotels in Florida.

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: Strk

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: Craig234

So I'm in favor for a variety of reasons of shifting the pendulum to the direction to make things easier for unions to be formed - I think they are good for society generally.

<facepalm> Yes, because we've seen clearly in every company and industry with strong union membership that things run efficiently and are very cost effective. :roll: Like the automobile .....errrr...... the steel indus........ummm, I mean..... the post office.....errrrrr.... well, the government offices like the dmv.......ooops.

Unions were a necessary evil at one point to offset employer power. The need for that protection has largely gone away (with certain exceptions), and unions should disappear with it. Anything done to wipe them out is generally a good thing.

A secret ballot does not benefit any side (employer / union) more than the other, it simply means people can vote the way they want to without facing repercussions from either side based on their vote. Attempting to remove that ability is just a ploy to force more people into unions.

Stagnant wages (real wages; adjusted for inflation etc) and companies cutting benefits (switching to very high deductible plans, among other things, that they also have to contribute into every month) tell a different story. Then again, I guess people enjoy their $2000+ deductible medical coverage since they keep arguing against their own benefit.

Unionizing won't fix any of those problems, it just forces companies to artificially overpay for labor, thus making them less competitive in the global market. Hello Detroit, hello steel industry etc etc. That's exactly why unions thrive in sectors where the employer doesn't have direct competition (like in many government jobs, school districts etc) or where there is no viable alternative.

 

[Deliximus]

the secret ballot was NEVER GONNA BE REMOVED in this bill. It's all Republican talking points. it's online, look it up.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: Craig234

So I'm in favor for a variety of reasons of shifting the pendulum to the direction to make things easier for unions to be formed - I think they are good for society generally.

<facepalm> Yes, because we've seen clearly in every company and industry with strong union membership that things run efficiently and are very cost effective. :roll: Like the automobile .....errrr...... the steel indus........ummm, I mean..... the post office.....errrrrr.... well, the government offices like the dmv.......ooops.

Unions were a necessary evil at one point to offset employer power. The need for that protection has largely gone away (with certain exceptions), and unions should disappear with it. Anything done to wipe them out is generally a good thing.

A secret ballot does not benefit any side (employer / union) more than the other, it simply means people can vote the way they want to without facing repercussions from either side based on their vote. Attempting to remove that ability is just a ploy to force more people into unions.

I would love to hear you explain why excessive employer power has gone away.

 

[ProfJohn]

eskimo, it sounds like you have no experience with unions and their tactics.

Last fall unions were calling and even showing up at the homes of retail pharmacists.

However, they weren't passing themselves of as unions, but instead claimed to be some group that wanted to help improve healthcare.

So they show up at the house and talk about how they want to improve healthcare and then ask you to sign up and join their group. Of course what you are really doing is signing a union card.

Put this new law in place and all the unions need is 50%+1 and BAM instant union.

 

[ProfJohn]

BTW I highly doubt this will become law AND pass a court test.

But if it does then I think it will backfire on the Democrats big time.

You think $60 million from the unions to get elected is a lot of money? Just wait till Walmart, Target, CVS, Walgreens etc etc etc all start giving money to people who will repeal this law.

Democrats in conservative districts would all of a sudden find themselves facing highly financed Republicans.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Deliximus
the secret ballot was NEVER GONNA BE REMOVED in this bill. It's all Republican talking points. it's online, look it up.

And what makes you think the people trying to organize the union would choose to have a secret ballot if they can intimidate enough people into signing the card?

Oh wait... you didn't think this through like most union apologists.

 

[Double Trouble]

I'm not sure how anyone could argue that a true secret vote is somehow unfair to them. Isn't that the basis of a democratic society? If voters can cast a ballot in secret they can decide without undue influence what they want to do. Any law threatening to remove that would allow for more coercion in an attempt to make people vote one way or the other (in this case, pro-union). A secret ballot should be mandatory for all such votes.

 

[sactoking]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
<facepalm> Yes, because we've seen clearly in every company and industry with strong union membership that things run efficiently and are very cost effective. :roll: Like the automobile .....errrr...... the steel indus........ummm, I mean..... the post office.....errrrrr.... well, the government offices like the dmv.......ooops.

Unions were a necessary evil at one point to offset employer power. The need for that protection has largely gone away (with certain exceptions), and unions should disappear with it. Anything done to wipe them out is generally a good thing.

This.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: sactoking

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
<facepalm> Yes, because we've seen clearly in every company and industry with strong union membership that things run efficiently and are very cost effective. :roll: Like the automobile .....errrr...... the steel indus........ummm, I mean..... the post office.....errrrrr.... well, the government offices like the dmv.......ooops.

Unions were a necessary evil at one point to offset employer power. The need for that protection has largely gone away (with certain exceptions), and unions should disappear with it. Anything done to wipe them out is generally a good thing.

This.

Yep, and now they are thrashing around trying to push through any legislation that will help them keep their power over the worker. Here in Iowa they have a multifaceted attack in process. Luckily atleast 1 bill failed to make it through the funnel process...but that doesn't mean it's entirely dead here due to how slimy the statehouse is.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: Strk

Stagnant wages (real wages; adjusted for inflation etc) and companies cutting benefits (switching to very high deductible plans, among other things, that they also have to contribute into every month) tell a different story. Then again, I guess people enjoy their $2000+ deductible medical coverage since they keep arguing against their own benefit.

Unionizing won't fix any of those problems, it just forces companies to artificially overpay for labor, thus making them less competitive in the global market. Hello Detroit, hello steel industry etc etc. That's exactly why unions thrive in sectors where the employer doesn't have direct competition (like in many government jobs, school districts etc) or where there is no viable alternative.

So, the stagnant wages we've had for the bottom 80% since Reagan started the war on unions, won't be helped by increasing the wages as 'companies overpay for labor?'

You seem to have stumbled over your ideological talking points, contradicting the points you are making.

Is your point that unions don't increase wages, or that they do and you think that's bad?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: Strk

Stagnant wages (real wages; adjusted for inflation etc) and companies cutting benefits (switching to very high deductible plans, among other things, that they also have to contribute into every month) tell a different story. Then again, I guess people enjoy their $2000+ deductible medical coverage since they keep arguing against their own benefit.

Unionizing won't fix any of those problems, it just forces companies to artificially overpay for labor, thus making them less competitive in the global market. Hello Detroit, hello steel industry etc etc. That's exactly why unions thrive in sectors where the employer doesn't have direct competition (like in many government jobs, school districts etc) or where there is no viable alternative.

So, the stagnant wages we've had for the bottom 80% since Reagan started the war on unions, won't be helped by increasing the wages as 'companies overpay for labor?'

You seem to have stumbled over your ideological talking points, contradicting the points you are making.

Is your point that unions don't increase wages, or that they do and you think that's bad?

Are you really that obtuse?

ARTIFICIALLY inflating wages won't do anything except make the numbers inflate all around OR depress them further as it drives companies elsewhere. This notion that unions will fix "stagnant wages" is absurd as none of this occurs in a vacuum. Placing an artificial force on a market will affect more than just 1 piece of the puzzle.

 

[Jhhnn]

Meh. Just more of the usual Rightwing FUD in the tried and true circle jerk format.

The proposed measure *does not* eliminate secret ballot elections.

Coercion? The most successful thugs wear three piece suits, fly in private jets, travel in chauffered limos- they have the ultimate form of coercion- paychecks. All they understand or appreciate is power, and individual employees have none, not in their eyes...

 

[Jadow]

this bill is a perfect example of unneeded legislation from top to bottom.