Page 1 of 1 pages
I support the Employee Free Choice Act. As a person who has experienced the illegal tactics of union busting corporate America, I feel the EFCA is long over due. My fear is that it is not enough and that it will do little to help workers in strong anti union right to work states such as Tennessee. The word union is a dirty word in much of the south. The politicians and corporate mogals have done an excellant job in their propaganda campaign against unions here in the south. I hope that the laws built around the EFCA and the NLRA send a clear message to employers that they can have their say but they had better be fair and just in their approach or they will suffer stiff penalties. The current system allows them to intimidate, threaten and fire with immunity from any real penalty. It is time that free association and the right to organize really be treated with the respect that the NRLA intended it to have.
Posted by Michael Chapman on Feb 2, 2009 at 12:31 PM
One might have expected better of Prof. Moberg. The American working class is better off now than it was 20 years ago, but it has lost ground relatively to the entrepreneurial, professional, and managerial classes. The reason has not been the weakness of unions. The vast majority of jobs in America are found in small business, which historically has not been fallow ground for unionization.
Three reasons explain this relative decline: inflation, illegal immigration, and poor public schools. When wages do not keep pace with inflation, real incomes decline. Workers have struggled to keep pace in America, and thus the relative decline resulted. Why? Illegal immigration has increased the supply of labor. Poor schools have wasted our investment in human capital.
What the law Prof. Moberg advocates for will do is deny the right to the secret ballot for union organization elections. That is wrong.
Posted by James Davidson on Feb 2, 2009 at 5:02 PM
Congress felt is was important to lecture other countries about the sanctity of the private ballot when it came to union elections. Funny how Congressional Democrats feel American’s should not have that option. But then again, it is the same Congressional Democrats who excuse tax cheats in their midst, now feel budget busting pork is acceptable, and still hate all things Bush.
Let the kids have fun. In a few years, they will be out of power, Obama will will be called Barak O’Carter and Hillary will be running for President while complaining about the vast right wing conspiracy yet again.
Posted by timstevens on Feb 2, 2009 at 5:40 PM
The reasons behind adopting the EFCA are to allow employees who wish to form a union do so without the intimidation of the employer and their anti union lawyers. There is nothing fair or just about the current system.
The EFCA allows for the employees to choose a secret ballot election if they choose. It also allows employees to meet and discuss and elect a union with a reduced intimidation campaign at the hands of their employer. If corporate America would only play by the rules none of this would be necessary. I agree with an employee
Posted by Michael Chapman on Feb 2, 2009 at 6:18 PM
If, indeed, the Employee Free Choice Act is to truly represent the choice of employees, then there should be a provision in the act that a union will be disenfranchised upon the signing of more than 50% of the employees involved!
Posted by Clark Crouch on Feb 2, 2009 at 7:07 PM
The whole point of an election to determine union representation is to create workplace democracy. Let majority rule on whether to have a union. Yet the secret ballot is basic to democracy. Union organizers, supported by Democrats in Congress, have rejected the secret ballot because they have a losing record. This is purely a power grab—at the expense of the worker who will lose the secret ballot.
Moberg tries to jstify this loss of a worker’s right to the secret ballot by his lament over an increase in income inequality. He doesn’t address the root causes, which leads one to believe he just wants to increase the power of union bosses. The fig leaf won’t cover up a power grab dressed in seep’s clothing, to mix metaphors.
Posted by James Davidson on Feb 2, 2009 at 7:36 PM
I think passing the free choice act would be very bad for this country especially given today’s economy. Obama know’s this to be true, and that it would be political suicide to try to get this through now.
He will come back to it if and when things even somewhat improve and it will be a major mistake. Look at the success of the Auto Companies in the south, compared to the near bankrupt Detroit failed business models. The primary reason they failed was the constant over reach by the unions to the point where the companies had job banks. A “job bank” is where one is paid 95% of their previous pay even if the company doesn’t need their services.
Anyone in business today is having a hard enough time just keeping their doors open and EMPLOYING people. Card check will be a major JOBS loser.
How can if be fair not to have a secret ballot where the INDIVIDUAL is FREE TO CHOOSE whom the want with a SECRET BALLOT. What on earth could be more fair then that?
Posted by danceswithtrees on Feb 2, 2009 at 8:31 PM
The Employee Free Choice Act will be completely useless for workers in twenty-eight states having “at-will hiring, at-will firing” legislation on their books.
“At-will hiring, at-will firing” is the main and primary impediment to union organizing in this country and we don’t hear one peep from the union leaderships on this problem.
What will the AFL-CIO and Change To Win propose Democrats do to rescind “at-will hiring, at-will firing” legislation in these twenty-eight states which include Minnesota and Michigan?
I have posed this question time, and time again, to state and federal legislators, Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Stern—- and the “progressive media,” including In These Times through comments and e-mails to the editors to no avail, which makes me wonder if there are many people who see politics as more of a game than a struggle to create a better life for working people.
Furthermore, given the nearly unanimous silence on the part of U.S. unions—- including the AFL-CIO and CTW—- while labor all over the world condemned Israel’s destructive pogrom and killing spree against the Palestinians in Gaza, one has to wonder if the Democratic Party is not playing working people for suckers and fools in using the Employee Free Choice Act as a club over the heads of organized labor: keep your mouths shut about everything else and “be good little boys and girls” and we might consider giving you a bone: EFCA.
That unions in this country have bought into imperialism in this way is contemptible and despicable and most likely has more to do with the failure of AFL-CIO & CTW unions being unable to organize beyond their present 11% of the workers in this country. Although the failure to protect the jobs of the workers they already collect dues from probably has a great deal to do with the disgraceful state of organized labor in this country, too.
“Getting ready to rumble?” More like running away from the class struggle with Barack Obama and the Democrats..
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Posted by alanmaki on Feb 4, 2009 at 8:13 AM
Corporate bosses and right wing zealots oppose EFCA because it will cause a definite change in the balance of power. What they do not say is that wealth is created through the labor of working people! No company could survive if not for the production of wealth by it’s workers!
Workers in England, France, Germany, Italy and other nations have far more protection to organize unions because their governments regard the right to organize a basic human right as described by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The U.S. along with a few banana republics and far east countries do not respect this right and subsequently workers do not enjoy the full benefits of their labor!
Personally I will work my ass off to see EFCA pass! The only concern I have with this most precious piece of legislation is that agricultural and public workers are NOT included!
Perhaps the CEO of Wal-Mart should try and survive on the poverty wages that his company pays! Perhaps all corporate CEO’s should move elsewhere and form their own fascist nation! Who needs corporate parasites anyway?
Posted by Chicano Wobbly on Feb 10, 2009 at 12:23 PM
Personally I fear that a more open process could be used by businesses to target pro union employees for harassment should an attempt at unionization fail.
Still while I don’t necessarily believe that this is the best move, I do think that something needs to be done to redress the massive imbalance in this country that makes it very easy for businesses to actively prevent unionization, and very difficult for workers to unionize, who wish to.
Posted by Toriach on Feb 21, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
I support the Employee Free Choice Act. As a person who has experienced the illegal tactics of union busting corporate America, I feel the EFCA is long over due. My fear is that it is not enough and that it will do little to help workers in strong anti union right to work states such as Tennessee. The word union is a dirty word in much of the south. The politicians and corporate mogals have done an excellant job in their propaganda campaign against unions here in the south. I hope that the laws built around the EFCA and the NLRA send a clear message to employers that they can have their say but they had better be fair and just in their approach or they will suffer stiff penalties. The current system allows them to intimidate, threaten and fire with immunity from any real penalty. It is time that free association and the right to organize really be treated with the respect that the NRLA intended it to have.
One might have expected better of Prof. Moberg. The American working class is better off now than it was 20 years ago, but it has lost ground relatively to the entrepreneurial, professional, and managerial classes. The reason has not been the weakness of unions. The vast majority of jobs in America are found in small business, which historically has not been fallow ground for unionization.
Three reasons explain this relative decline: inflation, illegal immigration, and poor public schools. When wages do not keep pace with inflation, real incomes decline. Workers have struggled to keep pace in America, and thus the relative decline resulted. Why? Illegal immigration has increased the supply of labor. Poor schools have wasted our investment in human capital.
What the law Prof. Moberg advocates for will do is deny the right to the secret ballot for union organization elections. That is wrong.
Congress felt is was important to lecture other countries about the sanctity of the private ballot when it came to union elections. Funny how Congressional Democrats feel American’s should not have that option. But then again, it is the same Congressional Democrats who excuse tax cheats in their midst, now feel budget busting pork is acceptable, and still hate all things Bush.
Let the kids have fun. In a few years, they will be out of power, Obama will will be called Barak O’Carter and Hillary will be running for President while complaining about the vast right wing conspiracy yet again.
The reasons behind adopting the EFCA are to allow employees who wish to form a union do so without the intimidation of the employer and their anti union lawyers. There is nothing fair or just about the current system.
The EFCA allows for the employees to choose a secret ballot election if they choose. It also allows employees to meet and discuss and elect a union with a reduced intimidation campaign at the hands of their employer. If corporate America would only play by the rules none of this would be necessary. I agree with an employee
If, indeed, the Employee Free Choice Act is to truly represent the choice of employees, then there should be a provision in the act that a union will be disenfranchised upon the signing of more than 50% of the employees involved!
The whole point of an election to determine union representation is to create workplace democracy. Let majority rule on whether to have a union. Yet the secret ballot is basic to democracy. Union organizers, supported by Democrats in Congress, have rejected the secret ballot because they have a losing record. This is purely a power grab—at the expense of the worker who will lose the secret ballot.
Moberg tries to jstify this loss of a worker’s right to the secret ballot by his lament over an increase in income inequality. He doesn’t address the root causes, which leads one to believe he just wants to increase the power of union bosses. The fig leaf won’t cover up a power grab dressed in seep’s clothing, to mix metaphors.
I think passing the free choice act would be very bad for this country especially given today’s economy. Obama know’s this to be true, and that it would be political suicide to try to get this through now.
He will come back to it if and when things even somewhat improve and it will be a major mistake. Look at the success of the Auto Companies in the south, compared to the near bankrupt Detroit failed business models. The primary reason they failed was the constant over reach by the unions to the point where the companies had job banks. A “job bank” is where one is paid 95% of their previous pay even if the company doesn’t need their services.
Anyone in business today is having a hard enough time just keeping their doors open and EMPLOYING people. Card check will be a major JOBS loser.
How can if be fair not to have a secret ballot where the INDIVIDUAL is FREE TO CHOOSE whom the want with a SECRET BALLOT. What on earth could be more fair then that?
The Employee Free Choice Act will be completely useless for workers in twenty-eight states having “at-will hiring, at-will firing” legislation on their books.
“At-will hiring, at-will firing” is the main and primary impediment to union organizing in this country and we don’t hear one peep from the union leaderships on this problem.
What will the AFL-CIO and Change To Win propose Democrats do to rescind “at-will hiring, at-will firing” legislation in these twenty-eight states which include Minnesota and Michigan?
I have posed this question time, and time again, to state and federal legislators, Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Stern—- and the “progressive media,” including In These Times through comments and e-mails to the editors to no avail, which makes me wonder if there are many people who see politics as more of a game than a struggle to create a better life for working people.
Furthermore, given the nearly unanimous silence on the part of U.S. unions—- including the AFL-CIO and CTW—- while labor all over the world condemned Israel’s destructive pogrom and killing spree against the Palestinians in Gaza, one has to wonder if the Democratic Party is not playing working people for suckers and fools in using the Employee Free Choice Act as a club over the heads of organized labor: keep your mouths shut about everything else and “be good little boys and girls” and we might consider giving you a bone: EFCA.
That unions in this country have bought into imperialism in this way is contemptible and despicable and most likely has more to do with the failure of AFL-CIO & CTW unions being unable to organize beyond their present 11% of the workers in this country. Although the failure to protect the jobs of the workers they already collect dues from probably has a great deal to do with the disgraceful state of organized labor in this country, too.
“Getting ready to rumble?” More like running away from the class struggle with Barack Obama and the Democrats..
Alan L. Maki
Director of Organizing,
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Corporate bosses and right wing zealots oppose EFCA because it will cause a definite change in the balance of power. What they do not say is that wealth is created through the labor of working people! No company could survive if not for the production of wealth by it’s workers!
Workers in England, France, Germany, Italy and other nations have far more protection to organize unions because their governments regard the right to organize a basic human right as described by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The U.S. along with a few banana republics and far east countries do not respect this right and subsequently workers do not enjoy the full benefits of their labor!
Personally I will work my ass off to see EFCA pass! The only concern I have with this most precious piece of legislation is that agricultural and public workers are NOT included!
Perhaps the CEO of Wal-Mart should try and survive on the poverty wages that his company pays! Perhaps all corporate CEO’s should move elsewhere and form their own fascist nation! Who needs corporate parasites anyway?
Personally I fear that a more open process could be used by businesses to target pro union employees for harassment should an attempt at unionization fail.
Still while I don’t necessarily believe that this is the best move, I do think that something needs to be done to redress the massive imbalance in this country that makes it very easy for businesses to actively prevent unionization, and very difficult for workers to unionize, who wish to.
register a new account »Posting Security