Donohue Wrong
In the February 3 edition of the South Bend Tribune, Thomas J. Donohue, president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce whined about the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) claiming that “Card Check” would eliminate secret ballots in elections where workers decide whether or not they want a union.
Donohue is wrong. His use of the term “Card Check”, more accurately referred to as “Majority Signup”, simply means that a union could be certified if more than half of the workers sign a card saying they want that union to represent them.
Under current law, if 30% of workers petition for a secret ballot unionization vote, they'll get it. Under the EFCA, if 30% of workers petition for a secret ballot unionization vote, they'll get it. The EFCA doesn’t change anything here. Workers would have the same right to have a secret ballot vote to unionize as they have today.
Here’s the difference. Under current law, if the workers come to the employer with a majority's worth of signed cards saying they want a certain union to represent them, for some strange reason, the employer has veto power over that. The employer can say, I don't accept these cards, and I demand that we start all over and have a secret ballot election about this issue.
Under the EFCA, that management veto power is taken away. Under the EFCA, the right to choose the certification method is placed back where it belongs, with the employees. If the workers at a given company choose to certify their desire for a union through the card check process, the employer must accept their decision.
6 comments:
They wouldn't publish this as a letter to the editor or as an op-ed piece? It'd be a shame if they wouldn't do the former.
To the substance of the letter: If there's a secret election, how does the firm have any meaningful veto power? If 30% want a vote, they can have it-- and if 50% want a union, they can have it-- with or without EFCA.
Independent of Donohue's position, it should be noted that the USCC is a pro-business group. Therefore, it is often NOT a pro-market group-- and thus, an entity whose policies I would at least question and would often oppose.
You are being very deceptive. It is true that if only 30% signed a card the the NLRB could be petitioned for an election. Of course, no one will ever do that. Unions lose elections where they don't have 60% or more cards signed. Many sign a card, but vote differently. That is the motivation behind card check. Eliminate the vote and eliminate those who change their minds.
BTW. The Employee Free Choice Act (card check) is costing jobs now. Many employers are facing the difficult task of what to do with their excess workforce in these slow economic times. Many are choosing to have a traditional layoff. My own company has been forced to have a layoff. However, fear of passage of the Employee Free Choice Act is forcing some companies to make the difficult decision to permanently fire employees. These fired employees will not have recall rights. If they are rehired, they will have to start all over for wages and benefits. Why is this? Fired employees can not be a part of a unionization campaign. If they have signed cards or sign cards in the future, these cards will not count under the EFCA. Most employers believe the 'card check' legislation will pass this year. President Obama supports this legislation and democrats control both houses of Congress. The House of Representatives has already passed this legislation. Employers are terrified of how easy it will be to unionize their workforces when this law passes. They are taking every step possible to prevent this from occurring. Unfortunately, this has a bad effect on employees who are being downsized.
Eric, the veto power I refer to is when workers go to the boss and say, "here, we have the required number of signed cards saying we want a union. Will you recognize us as a union?"
The boss is then able to say, "no, you'll have to go to the National Labor Relations Board and ask for an election."
Workers who want union recognition aren't interested in having an election. Never have been, never will be.
Redneck,
Deceptive but accurate at the same time? Wow, first time that's ever happened.
Workers who sign cards saying they want recognition aren't interested in having any election. They want a union. It's the bosses that demand elections.
It's not the Union that loses an election, it's the workers who want a union that sometimes lose.
The workers are not a union in this case. They want to unionize, but aren't sure how to go about doing that. So, they approach a Union and ask for help. The Union can help them, but the workers are the ones who have to get the cards signed.
If the workers get the proper number of signed cards but the boss won't recognize them as a union, the NLRB has a unionization election. If the workers lose the election, they lose.
The Union, such as the United Steelworkers Union, simply helps the workers.
Hey, if an employer has two many workers, they're going to get rid of them whether they have a union or not. The difference is that if you are unionized, they can't fire you without just cause.
Brother, sounds to me like you need a union.
"Redneck,
Deceptive but accurate at the same time? Wow, first time that's ever happened.
Workers who sign cards saying they want recognition aren't interested in having any election. They want a union. It's the bosses that demand elections."
I was trying to be polite, but you seem to want to play word games instead of responding to my points.
Let me be more clear. It is a lie to say that all employees who will sign a card want an election. Unions get less votes in secret ballot elections than they have cards signed. If everyone who signed a card voted for the union, card check would be mostly pointless and companies would have no reason to oppose it.
The fact that something is 'technically possible" does not mean it will ever happen in our lifetime. It is disingenuous to say there will still be union elections after card check is enacted. No union will call an election with 30% cards signed. It would be a waste of their resources. If 50% plus 1 sign cards, there will not be an election no matter if the company or employees want one. It can not happen under this law. The union is automatically recognized.
Redneck,
A very good point you've made.
However, it's not the unions that get less votes, it's the workers that get less votes. The union doesn't vote.
The reason the workers get less votes is another reason that the EFCA is so necessary; Between the time that the election is called for and the time the vote takes place is about 40 days. That's when the employer calls in his million dollar union busting law firm and proceeds to browbeat the workers, threaten them, coerce them, fire them, threaten to move the company to China, etc., By that time some workers are scared to death and so they vote not to unionise.
Thanks for the tip.
It's always good to find a better way to explain why the Employee Free Choice is so needed.
Nobody would want to go through that.
Post a Comment