Union card check: Wait
John Brummett thinks Barack Obama would do well, politically at least, not to have the early days of his administration defined by a vote on union card check legislation (a measure whose impact is so wildly overblown by management that it hardly bears mentioning.) My opinion" stymying the working people who worked so hard for a Democratic administration won't earn Obama any lasting credit with management forces.
RELATED: Management also would like Obama to keep his hands off the new Bush rule making it harder to regulate toxic substances to which workers are exposed.



Comments
Aside from the misleading title, it is hard to generalize abandoning the secret ballot in elections.
I surely don't want the minister of my church stopping by with the new lottery amendment ballot or the NRA neighbor with the new control measure ballot.
Just because you approve of the goal is no reason to support giving up the freedom of the secret ballot.
Posted by: mudturtle
|
December 1, 2008 06:49 AM
Nice thing about this nation is that construction company executives and old boys with Baldor Electric have the same number of votes as their lowly paid workers.
I wonder if unionization activities will include newspapers?
Mention the word "union" or "organize" around The Moron News in NWA and I hope your
life insurance is paid.
BHO administration could simply shorten the allowed 42 days wherein the bosses can presently fire or intimidate anyone interested in signing a card before a vote is taken. They could shorten it to 8 days grace before NLRB comes in to conduct an election.
.
Posted by: eLwood
|
December 1, 2008 06:51 AM
Well personally, I think 8 days is w-a-y too short. You want the voters to at least understand the issue......ooh I forgot we did away with that this year!
Leave the rule at 42 days. Let anyone who is an employee at the time the vote was called vote whether they have been fired or now. Since anyone fired would likely vote pro-union, management would be fighting to shorten the time.
Now both sides want a shorter election.
Posted by: mudturtle
|
December 1, 2008 07:09 AM
Speaking of Baldor and NWA, we have a dusting of our first white stuff this morning, with some icy steps and slippery sidewalks. Last night's low was around 26 when I took the beast out. Cars seem to have no problem.
.
Posted by: eLwood
|
December 1, 2008 07:14 AM
There is no secret ballet in elections so nothing lost. 8 or 42 days makes no difference to those that want to be informed or those that don't want to be informed; it does make a difference to troublemakers. Given the current administrations' insistence on always choosing the worse of two evils, if Bush Co is for it then it's probably bad.
"My father always told me that all businessmen were sons of bitches, but I never believed it till now. -- (Comment made 10 April 1962 in reaction to news that U.S. Steel was raising prices by $6 per ton, right after the unions negotiated a modest new contract under pressure from JFK to keep inflation down.)" John F. Kennedy
Posted by: Zatharus
|
December 1, 2008 09:45 AM
Given that unions have done so much to put our automobile industry out of business, why not let them take over all American industry and service jobs? I'm sure the union card check legislation is being cosponsored by the Chinese government, because it will lead to increased business for Chinese factories. Let's be sure to increase our business taxes and restrictions on harvesting oil and natural gas so that we can be even more dependent on foreign countries. I'm sure after we're completely bankrupt, the Chinese will just forgive our debt.
Posted by: Severus
|
December 1, 2008 09:45 AM
Brummett may be right about this matter, although the political downside of championing workers' welfare would not be as great as championing gay rights in military service. Obama's experience as a community organizer should make him good at judging what issues he can win with right now and which ones need to wait until the organization gains enough strength from winning.
Sooner or later, IMO, basic change in the direction of the country has to mean establishing that corporations exist by sufferance of the people and their government and that their enterprise, methods, and products must serve all stakeholders, not merely stockholders. Among other things, if they abuse their workforce or grossly commit ecological sin, they must make an attitude adjustment or be put out of business.
Posted by: Snapback
|
December 1, 2008 09:55 AM
Push that fear button! It beats trying to explain why management is rewarded for failure and labor is punished for success.
(A blast from the past)
"Long ago we stated the reason for labour organizations. We said that union was essential to give labourers opportunity to deal on an equality with their employers." US Supreme Court
Posted by: Zatharus
|
December 1, 2008 09:56 AM
"There is no secret ballet in elections so nothing lost."
Good, because I would hate to see either Jimmy Hoffa or Bill Gates in a tutu!
Posted by: mudturtle
|
December 1, 2008 01:05 PM