Union in Indiana does end run around Unionization laws.

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
230 out of 450 employees don't want Union but were forced into it anyway...now seek to decertification the supposed "election"

****************
Goshen, Ind. (March 26, 2004) ? A majority of employees at Cequent Towing Product?s Goshen facility have filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) asking that local union officials be stripped of their newly granted ?exclusive representation? power over roughly 450 of the company?s employees. The petition was filed with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys.

More than 230 workers signed the petition, which was given to Cequent before it recognized the United Steel Workers of America (USWA) union as their ?exclusive bargaining representative? earlier this week. As a result of that recognition, employees were denied the opportunity to vote on union status through a secret ballot. If a decertification election is allowed and is successful, all Ceuqent employees then would be free to negotiate their own terms and conditions of employment, and would not be forced to pay union dues.

The workers who signed the petition each declared that they do not want USWA officials bargaining on their behalf, revoked any previously signed union recognition cards, and asked for a secret ballot election on their union status. Under federal labor law, petitioning employees need only obtain signatures from 30 percent in the bargaining unit to trigger a decertification election.

?Workers should have the right to cast off the unwanted monopoly representation of union officials at any time,? said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. ?It?s an outrage that Cequent struck a backroom deal with USWA officials to deny them so much as a secret ballot vote.?

Earlier this week, the union was chosen by the employer pursuant to a so-called ?neutrality? agreement and a ?card check? authorization process ? a process that bypasses a secret ballot election and allows union officials to bully workers one-on-one into signing union recognition cards. In recent years union organizers have had less success in persuading employees to vote in favor of unionization and have instead focused on eliciting employer support to corral workers into union collectives through methods that curtail employee free choice in the union recognition process.

Meanwhile, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys are currently in U.S. District Court challenging the secret deal between Heartland Industrial Partners (Cequent?s parent company) and the USWA union that forces companies acquired under Heartland?s umbrella actively to help the union organize employees and ultimately force them to pay union dues as a job condition. In return, USWA officials pour unsuspecting workers? trust funds into Heartland, promise to stifle certain employee rights under federal law, and limit employees? ability to influence their own wages, benefits, and working conditions.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by compulsory unionism abuses. The Foundation, which can be contacted toll-free at 1-800-336-3600, is assisting thousands of employees in close to 300 cases nationwide.
**********************

Interesting...
I guess we'll see if the corp and union comply with the LAW regarding the 30% petition and secret ballot proceedure.

CkG
 

Bleep

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
3,972
0
0
You must have a very exciting life just trying to find lying crap like this to post. Do you record Sean Hannity and Rush to play over and over again?
Even if it is true does it have any efect on your life or your well being? For what reason do you post this kind of stuff?? I bet it is to inform America that our country and our labor laws are so screwed up that everyone should just move somewhere else.

Bleep
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Bleep
You must have a very exciting life just trying to find lying crap like this to post. Do you record Sean Hannity and Rush to play over and over again?
Even if it is true does it have any efect on your life or your well being? For what reason do you post this kind of stuff?? I bet it is to inform America that our country and our labor laws are so screwed up that everyone should just move somewhere else.

Bleep

Oh, it is true Bleep, and union's strong arm tactics have been increasing as they lose membership and political power. Did you know that Unions collect over 6 BILLION dollars per year in dues? I wonder how much their political contributions will total this year...;) They contributed over 90 million in the 2000 election and 94% of that went to Democrats. Hmmm...

Edit - Labor unions made up 11 of the top 20 political action committee contributors to federal candidates in the 2000 election. -WOW

CkG
 

Dman877

Platinum Member
Jan 15, 2004
2,707
0
0
Unfortunately, union organizers and delegates are no more immune to corruption and power-mongering then anyone else. This isn't a strike against unions, its a clear-cut case of corruption, which in Cheney's America, seems to be in vogue anyway.
 

Zephyr106

Banned
Jul 2, 2003
1,309
0
0
This is all the more reason for outsourcing.

American's can't be trusted to do anything, every American job needs to be outsourced to 3rd world nations with no unions.

Zephyr
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Zephyr106
This is all the more reason for outsourcing.

I wouldn't doubt that unionized labor has caused some companies to outsource because of bloated compensation packages demanded by Unions(among other things)....but that is a different story all together. This is about the corruption and strong arm tactics by union to railroad employees into becoming union members.

CkG
 

Zephyr106

Banned
Jul 2, 2003
1,309
0
0
The CEOs should outsource more just to show their displeasure with this Union bvllshit. Even if outsourcing is economically unjustified. By hurting unpatriotic union workers, they'll really show them who's boss. The poor and middle classes have a duty to make America better, and helping the wealthy is one way of doing that.

Zephyr
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by:CADkindaGUY


Interesting...
I guess we'll see if the corp and union comply with the LAW regarding the 30% petition and secret ballot proceedure. CkG

You should be thrilled by this since this is the way the Federal Election is done.



 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by:CADkindaGUY


Interesting...
I guess we'll see if the corp and union comply with the LAW regarding the 30% petition and secret ballot proceedure. CkG

You should be thrilled by this since this is the way the Federal Election is done.

Oh really? I'm quite positive our Electoral system for electing a President didn't do an end run around the rules...

Anyway - nice try dave. Best go brush up on your blue screen pointing skills.

CkG
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by:CADkindaGUY


Interesting...
I guess we'll see if the corp and union comply with the LAW regarding the 30% petition and secret ballot proceedure. CkG

You should be thrilled by this since this is the way the Federal Election is done.

Oh really? I'm quite positive our Electoral system for electing a President didn't do an end run around the rules...

Anyway - nice try dave. Best go brush up on your blue screen pointing skills.

CkG

The screen is Green now.


 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by:CADkindaGUY


Interesting...
I guess we'll see if the corp and union comply with the LAW regarding the 30% petition and secret ballot proceedure. CkG

You should be thrilled by this since this is the way the Federal Election is done.

Oh really? I'm quite positive our Electoral system for electing a President didn't do an end run around the rules...

Anyway - nice try dave. Best go brush up on your blue screen pointing skills.

CkG

The screen is Green now.

All the better - it'll match your envy;)
:D

EDIT - oh wait...then people won't be able to see you...

Edit2 - nevermind...maybe that's a good thing:p

CkG
 

Ferocious

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2000
4,584
2
71
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Ferocious
Right-to-work laws should be abolished.

Let the people choose!

Those two statements don't mesh. Right to work laws gave workers the right to choose.

CkG

Nonsense.

The main difference between RTW states and non-RTW states is one thing:

Workers in non-RTW states are allowed to be represented with a contract that keeps out moochers. RTW laws make this ILLEGAL.

Seems like RTW laws eliminate a choice. And a critical choice at that.

.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Ferocious
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Ferocious
Right-to-work laws should be abolished.

Let the people choose!

Those two statements don't mesh. Right to work laws gave workers the right to choose.

CkG

Nonsense.

The main difference between RTW states and non-RTW states is one thing:

Workers in non-RTW states are allowed to be represented with a contract that keeps out moochers. RTW laws make this ILLEGAL.

Seems like RTW laws eliminate a choice. And a critical choice at that.

.

Yep - up is down left is right:p - In nonRTW states a worker has NO choice wether to join a union if one is established there. But in RTW states the worker can CHOOSE to not join the Union. THAT is choice:p

Now what you continually forget is that Unions do NOT have to choose to create an exclusive bargaining type of Union which would "protect" them from "moochers" as you call them.

CkG
 
May 10, 2001
2,669
0
0
Workers in non-RTW states are allowed to be represented with a contract that keeps out moochers. RTW laws make this ILLEGAL.
what exactly is a 'moocher'? Someone that accepts market clearing price for his labor? someone who accepts the inflated cost for his labor without paying union dues?

have you considered that more people would be employed with things costing less if it weren't for the union members driving up cost of production?



Seems like RTW laws eliminate a choice. And a critical choice at that
cad pointed this out: but a RTW state just makes i so you have a choice not to join a union, a critical choice not to belong to an organization that is most probably going to give money to candidates that you might not want to support;

not giving people RTW is like legislating donations to be given to the democratic party.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
Whenever the subject of Unions and RTW comes up, CkG seems to find it necessary to inject this falsehood-

Now what you continually forget is that Unions do NOT have to choose to create an exclusive bargaining type of Union which would "protect" them from "moochers" as you call them.

Which is complete FUD. Federal law demands that Unions represent all the workers in a bargaining unit if a majority have opted for union representation, RTW state or not. Yes, Unions want it that way, but it's still a requirement of the law, with sound underpinnings in democratic principles.

Too bad we can't apply CkG's "principles" on a national level- Americans who didn't vote for Bush (actually a majority) wouldn't have to comply with executive directives, either. Which is an absurd proposition, natch, but no more absurd than the one advanced by CkG and other RTW advocates.

I also attempted several search engine queries, all of which came up empty- apparently only the linked site finds this incident to be of major import. And I'm confident the spin imparted to the whole thing isn't exactly neutral. Seems to me that it's a little premature to make any judgements- wait until after the de-certification election before crying foul. RTW advocates are scared sh!tless of card-check unionization- it effectively denies many of the strongarm tactics used by employers to prevent unionization.

Despite claims to the contrary, Guido and Vinnie don't do Labor organizing much any more- their grandchildren do security consulting work and training for outfits like Walmart, and other unspecified security services for the campaign to re-elect the president. Organized crime went legit- they're now Republican.

http://mediafilter.org/caq/CAQ54p.police.html
 

Ferocious

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2000
4,584
2
71
Moocher: People who like to get something for nothing.

Let me try and re-explain for the totally brainwashed....

A) RTW.....Employees and Company can NOT negotiate a closed shop agreement. They have NO choice.....it is ILLEGAL.

B) Non-RTW state....Employees and Company are allowed to negotiate such a deal. They have A choice...it is LEGAL.

RTW laws doing nothing but remove a choice by allowing for government legislative interference to step into the picture.

A key reason why Libertarians hate RTW laws.


 

JackDawkins

Senior member
Aug 15, 2003
254
0
0
Originally posted by: Ferocious
Moocher: People who like to get something for nothing.

Let me try and re-explain for the totally brainwashed....

A) RTW.....Employees and Company can NOT negotiate a closed shop agreement. They have NO choice.....it is ILLEGAL.

B) Non-RTW state....Employees and Company are allowed to negotiate such a deal. They have A choice...it is LEGAL.

RTW laws doing nothing but remove a choice by allowing for government legislative interference to step into the picture.

A key reason why Libertarians hate RTW laws.
Is this bizarro world?

A Right to Work law secures the right of employees to decide for themselves whether or not to join or financially support a union. = Choice.

Non Right to Work states offer no opportunity for the employee to decide; they must join the union in order to work. = No Choice.



 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by:Jhhnn

Despite claims to the contrary, Guido and Vinnie don't do Labor organizing much any more- their grandchildren do security consulting work and training for outfits like Walmart, and other unspecified security services for the campaign to re-elect the president. Organized crime went legit- they're now Republican.

Amen brother.

If that wasn't so long I would use that as my sig. :D
 

DZip

Senior member
Apr 11, 2000
375
0
0
Truly amazing how so many people can overlook the difference between right and wrong. All that really matters any more is winning. We are rapidly becoming a nation with no moral character. We allow the few to make the rules. Today, the good of the union overrules the good of the members. It the power thing. The union spends money of political campaigns without even consulting the membership. Why should I have to pay protection money to a union only to have my money used against a political candidate I support?
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
In a RTW state can a Union pull it's members off a job if the Employer hires non union workers?
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: DZip
Truly amazing how so many people can overlook the difference between right and wrong. All that really matters any more is winning. We are rapidly becoming a nation with no moral character. We allow the few to make the rules.

Mob rule, Reich, no matter what you call it, that's what it is.

America had Character and Principle.

Now it is run by Characters with no priciple other than idolizing the almighty money.

America stood for Liberty, Freedom and the pursuit of happiness.

Now it stands for nothing other than the almighty money, not even the American Dollar as the Traitorist Corporate Thieving Thugs pillage money from all monies especially in India and China.

It will inevitably and sooner than later fall because of it.

So sad.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
A Right to Work law secures the right of employees to decide for themselves whether or not to join or financially support a union. = Choice.

Non Right to Work states offer no opportunity for the employee to decide; they must join the union in order to work. = No Choice.

Not exactly true. Unions are an example of Democracy in action, majority rule. That's very dependent on participation by the members- complacency is something lousy leadership depends on, whether they're in the union office or the Whitehouse. The decertification procedure is really pretty liberal, requiring only that a petition signed by 30% of the group be presented to have a de-certification election.

New employees in a Union Shop scenario, even in a RTW state, must, of course, pay that portion of the dues used for non-political purposes. Their coworkers chose union representation at some point in the past through a majority decision, and they all maintain the right and the means to seek democratic de-certification of the Union. Following the RTW line of reasoning, immigrants shouldn't have to pay taxes, either, even though the majority of citizens they join has democratically decided that they'll all pay taxes. Again, it's an absurdity.

Democracy isn't absolute freedom, nor can it ever be. But it's a nice alternative to Totalitarianism or Anarchy, both of which have distinct disadvantages. RTW laws are a misnomer- they're intended to cripple democratic action by workers, reduce them to anarchy, so that Management can more easily implement totalitarian control. Basic weasel maneuver allowed in the compromises necessary to establish Federal labor laws at the time of writing.

In a RTW state can a Union pull it's members off a job if the Employer hires non union workers?

As I said before, any new workers would have to pay dues, not including any portion used for political purposes. It would be illegal for the employer to hire new workers in that work group without making such a pre-condition of employment. It might spark a walkout, more likely the Union would seek injunctive relief thru the Courts.