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.
With the new law workers will have a CHOICE of secret ballots or not.
Companies that treat their workers with respect, fairly, and reward them with good wages,don't have much to worry about from unions.
I'm not aware of the details, are you saying that each employee can decline cardcheck and specify a secret ballot? That's a touch better, but not much, in that a union organizer can still intimidate anyone that asks to vote in secret.
I do agree with your past paragraph, companies tend to get the union they deserve.
Whatever union intimidation you are talking about is no less real than what employers do to discourage workers from joining unions...They flat out fire people for promoting unions and create some false reason.
Then why is secret balloting an issue? It seems like pro-union people should be even more in favor of it, rather than having the company know who "signed" for the union.
I'm not aware of the details, are you saying that each employee can decline cardcheck and specify a secret ballot? That's a touch better, but not much, in that a union organizer can still intimidate anyone that asks to vote in secret.
I do agree with your past paragraph, companies tend to get the union they deserve.
With the new law, unions can pursue employees asking them to sign the card saying they want to go union. When they have a majority of employees signed up, they contact the Labor Board. The Labor Board advises the employer, and provides them with the names of those employees, employer confirms they are employees, Labor Board certifies it and names the union as the appointed negotiator between employees and employer. A secret ballot vote can be requested, by the union---not the employees and not the employer. Since it would not be in the interests of the union to have that vote, this legislation is removing the secret ballot from the unionization process.
How many employees signing that card will be unaware that they are not asking for a vote, but are, in effect, signing up for the union? No, employers are not perfect, but unions aren't either. Unions are businesses, themselves. They are in the business of selling their negotiating skills. And it's in their own interests to encourage disgruntlement and dissatisfaction, and to sell a picture of employers as exploiters of the middle class while unions are the defenders of that middle class. But that picture is not wholly accurate. Because just as employers do, indeed, exploit their workers, unions also exploit them. Because those workers are paying customers who have to be continually sold on the advantages of negotiating via the union with their employer, and the disadvantages of negotiating directly with the employer.
There may be hope for us afterall. Workers standing up for themselves after thirty years of right wing ideology saying it's wrong.
I don't think you understand what this issue is about (no surprise). This is about an undemocratic voting scheme that eliminates the privacy of the "secret ballot", and will lead to intimidation of employees by union organizers.
This move is for purposes of giving more power to unions (and to Democrats, by extension). Nothing more. It has nothing to do with making it "easier to join a union".
It isn't right, it is unAmerican, and it's just plain wrong. All voting should be in secret. No one has the right to know how you vote, or to intimidate you to vote a certain way.
Congradulations you have managed to hit every single stereotype that the right wing has spewed over the last 30 years. Wow you did all in one post amazing.
Has he really? Around here, when the unions strike, there is violence, vandalism, and all kinds of crime agains those who "cross the lines". Uninions are run by thugs, just like he said. They really ought to be illegal. They have outlived their usefulness (if they ever were useful).
And he's right; they have destroyed many companies (and GM is about to become one of them).
Has he really? Around here, when the unions strike, there is violence, vandalism, and all kinds of crime agains those who "cross the lines". Uninions are run by thugs, just like he said. They really ought to be illegal. They have outlived their usefulness (if they ever were useful).
And he's right; they have destroyed many companies (and GM is about to become one of them).
Thugs I doubt that. Unions are run by moms and dads, brothers, sisters and cousins. There run by Little league coaches and Girl Scout leaders. On Sundays you'll find them either sitting next to you in church or teaching your children in Sunday School. Yet because of your politics you call them thugs.
I also wonder just what unions you're talking about causing all that violence in farm country Ohio. You see it's my experience that the unions are usually weak in rural America while having their strength in the cities. So I was wondering if you could link to your local paper that tell of these atrocities.
Most Americans favor making it easier to join a union, but most Americans familiar with this bill are opposed to it. How's that?
How's that? That's you not knowing what you're talking about.
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.
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.
