Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-13-2009, 06:13 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,694,120 times
Reputation: 35920

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by seamusnh View Post
It is indefensible. The secret ballot is an American tradition. I like the commercial George McGovern did condemning card check.

YouTube - George McGovern on the Employee Free Choice Act
I can't watch videos on my computer, but I've seen his commercial, which is running here.

I remember the first election I particpated in. My Brownie Girl Scout troop elected officers. We stood in a circle with our hands behind our backs, and voted by raising our hand behind us. Secret ballot. I have never particpated in an election since that wasn't secret ballot, including student council, church youth group, you name it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-13-2009, 06:18 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
4,897 posts, read 8,315,282 times
Reputation: 1911
I see the lies continue. The Employee Free Choice Act does not in any way eliminate the secret vote. What it does do is allow workers themselves to decide if they want to accept absentee ballots or not. That's it. That's all it does.

Yet the Republicans continue to lie about this bill and vilify it because they know that if you make it easier to vote then more people will vote and so it is likely more people will unionize. That's why Republicans want it to be as difficult as possible to vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2009, 07:41 PM
 
Location: Fort Worth
358 posts, read 472,159 times
Reputation: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerdin View Post
I see the lies continue. The Employee Free Choice Act does not in any way eliminate the secret vote. What it does do is allow workers themselves to decide if they want to accept absentee ballots or not. That's it. That's all it does.

Yet the Republicans continue to lie about this bill and vilify it because they know that if you make it easier to vote then more people will vote and so it is likely more people will unionize. That's why Republicans want it to be as difficult as possible to vote.
Exactly!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2009, 08:50 PM
 
5,652 posts, read 19,344,148 times
Reputation: 4118
There is a new bill that they are looking to push through employee choice union act or something like that. They want to eliminate the private elections and just get the cards themselves or something? Anyone know about it? Somehow Kennedy was involved in trying to get it through and it got shot down. But obama was the original co-sponsor of the bill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2009, 09:17 PM
 
1,902 posts, read 2,467,414 times
Reputation: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerdin View Post
I see the lies continue. The Employee Free Choice Act does not in any way eliminate the secret vote. What it does do is allow workers themselves to decide if they want to accept absentee ballots or not. That's it. That's all it does.

Yet the Republicans continue to lie about this bill and vilify it because they know that if you make it easier to vote then more people will vote and so it is likely more people will unionize. That's why Republicans want it to be as difficult as possible to vote.
Well it would seem that all these publication don't have the same view as you. And they are not all lying republicans either.

Quote:
McGovern is featured in a television ad sponsored by EmployeeFreedom.org, which lists itself as a nonpartisan, nonprofit group dedicated to defeating the bill.
Quote:
“It's hard to believe that any politician would agree to a law denying millions of employees the right to a private vote," McGovern says in the ad. "I've always been a champion of labor unions, but I fear that today's union leaders are turning their backs on democratic workplace elections. . . . Quite simply, this proposed law cannot be justified."
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/story/945055.html

Quote:
At the center is the Employee Free Choice Act, which would amend existing labor law. If passed, workers could form a union if the majority of them sign cards requesting one. That would be a change from current law, where employers can require a secret ballot, which takes more time and allows more employer input.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101677322

Quote:
Neal Catlett, a former president of the union representing workers at Whirlpool’s Fort Smith plant who has more than 20 years of leadership experience in the local union.
Quote:
Catlett, now retired from Whirlpool, opposes card check. He told The City Wire that he has seen plenty of “nonsense†among Whirlpool leaders and union leaders to know that anything other than a secret ballot will lead to intimidation, coercion and corruption on all sides.
“I strongly support secret ballots. Period. It doesn’t matter at what level, whether it is voting for a union or the president or your congressman,†Catlett said. “Your ideas should be personal as to if you want a union or don’t want a union.â€
Former Whirlpool union president opposes card check legislation | The City Wire


Quote:
EFCA, sometimes called “card-check,†should increase union membership if passed. Workers could bypass a secret-ballot election as long as a majority of them sign cards stating their intention to organize

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/biden-backs-labors-card-check-efforts-2009-03-05.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2009, 12:05 AM
 
Location: Thumb of Michigan
4,494 posts, read 7,479,293 times
Reputation: 2541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerdin View Post
I see the lies continue. The Employee Free Choice Act does not in any way eliminate the secret vote. What it does do is allow workers themselves to decide if they want to accept absentee ballots or not. That's it. That's all it does.

Yet the Republicans continue to lie about this bill and vilify it because they know that if you make it easier to vote then more people will vote and so it is likely more people will unionize. That's why Republicans want it to be as difficult as possible to vote.
As i understand it, it removes one of the more common intimidation factor by the employer who's tactically delaying negotiations, due to the secret ballot, over the course of time.

[This is where the bill comes in]

This way, an arbritrator can step in and reconcile the negotiations to some conclusion.


That is part of the reason, as i understand it, why there's an "open-ballot".

Correct me if i'm wrong, please.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2009, 12:09 AM
 
Location: Thumb of Michigan
4,494 posts, read 7,479,293 times
Reputation: 2541
Quote:
Originally Posted by censusdata View Post
Isn't denying a worker the right for a private vote on union issues as bad as prohibiting a worker from joining a Union?
See post # 66
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2009, 01:45 AM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
4,897 posts, read 8,315,282 times
Reputation: 1911
Coastalrap,

As I said earlier currently employers can say absentee ballots are not anonymous and so claim they are illegal. This is a game employers like to play because if 50% of the total work force doesn't physically walk down to the polling area and vote to unionize then the union drive fails. The Employee Free Choice Act allows the employees themselves to decide if they want to accept absentee ballots or not thus the name "free choice". This is important because it can make union drives so much easier because all people have to do is fill out and mail a simple absentee ballot days or even weeks before the actual poll so it is much easier to make sure everyone votes and so reach the 50% total.

The fact that Republicans continue to lie and say that allowing absentee ballots "destroys anonymity" shows you 1) they just hate unions and 2) they're against anything which helps regular people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2009, 07:23 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,861,612 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerdin View Post
Coastalrap,

As I said earlier currently employers can say absentee ballots are not anonymous and so claim they are illegal. This is a game employers like to play because if 50% of the total work force doesn't physically walk down to the polling area and vote to unionize then the union drive fails. The Employee Free Choice Act allows the employees themselves to decide if they want to accept absentee ballots or not thus the name "free choice". This is important because it can make union drives so much easier because all people have to do is fill out and mail a simple absentee ballot days or even weeks before the actual poll so it is much easier to make sure everyone votes and so reach the 50% total.

The fact that Republicans continue to lie and say that allowing absentee ballots "destroys anonymity" shows you 1) they just hate unions and 2) they're against anything which helps regular people.
Oerdin, you keep on citing absentee ballots. Why? How many times are absentee ballots mentioned in the bill?

This act is about making it easier for unions to unionize the workplace. The unions say that secret ballot elections are a delay tactic by the employer. The proposed legislation is that if the majority of employees card-check that they want the union, then the employer verifies that those employees are actual employees, and the Labor Board certifies the union as the negotiator for the employees and contract negotiations are commenced. There aren't absentee ballots because there aren't elections. Saying that the law doesn't do away with elections because the union can request them (not the employer, not the employees) is disingenuous at best. What union is going to request an election when they can simply pursue the people who haven't signed the card-check?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:33 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top