Republicans move to protect the secret ballot.

[Sukerkin]

I'll never understand the vitriol against Unions I read on these pages - those of you who are working men are mad if you are not in favour of collective bargaining and making sure you get something like reasonable conditions.

Not so very long ago, decent and desperate men over here lost their lives to make sure that we have such things as paid holidays, sick leave and defence against unfair dismissal.

If you want rid of that then you deserve anything that happens to you as you cry at the unfairness of it all.

I have asked before and not really got a totally clear answer - how did the history of unionisation in the States differ from over here that those it is designed to defend rail against it?

The caveat is, of course, that any organised and politically motivated structure will naturally tend to draw power to itself rather than executing its intended function but when people go on about the 'evil' of Unions ... well, it's a good job my grandfathers are not still alive to give you the wake up call you deserve.

 

[Archangel M]

I think it's more about restoring balance. Some unions now have so much power over the entities that employ them that their cash cow is about to keel over.

Some of the larger unions have driven the business they work for into the ground. IMO it was the dawn of the "megaunions"; AFL-CIO, Teamsters, SEIU, etc that was the start of our "problem". Now instead of individual plants being able to deal with their workers it was the entire industry having to bargain with a "union machine". And with them came the corruption, politics, organized crime, etc.

I have NOTHING against collective bargaining, I am a member of a PBA myself. However, our union is just our dept membership..we are not part of a megaunion and I like that just fine. I don't want to have to abide by decisions made for all cops in the entire US. We have different needs and a different environment here than they do on the other side of the country.

 

[Sukerkin]

An interesting point there, Angel, aye. As I noted, any political structure has an unfortunate tendency to try and acculumate power rather than execute the function it is intended for.

 

[CoryKS]

This is specious in extreme.Once the authorization cards are turned in, they already know who didn't sign them-it's only after they're turned in, and in any number greater than 50% (50%+1) that the apparently sacred 'secret ballot election" takes place. All the bill does is eliminate the completely unecessary step of the "secret ballot election."

"Completely unecessary" since more than 50% have already authorized the union in order for it to take place, and would presumably vote the same way.


You can read the basics about card-checks here. The Republicans aren't defending the secret ballot-they're defending an impediment to organizing that favors corporations-it's just not necessary.



No reason to keep it, no real reason to do away with it: if it does take place, it's a foregone conclusion, since the workforce has already authorized it in numbers that support the union.

But isn't it possible that some of the >50% who authorized it only voted that way because it would be known whether they signed it, and that they may change their vote when given a secret option? It sounds to me like the secret ballot is the only way to not out oneself as being anti-union.

 

[Big Don]

But isn't it possible that some of the >50% who authorized it only voted that way because it would be known whether they signed it, and that they may change their vote when given a secret option? It sounds to me like the secret ballot is the only way to not out oneself as being anti-union.

Are you suggesting that some unions might pressure people to join?

 

[billc]

Coryks, that is an excellent point. I would probably sign a card to allow the vote, myself, but would vote against the union. I believe in the ballot process enough to let it go forward, but I am against these unions. The biggest most powerful unions are destroying the industries that they are in and are about to destroy the pension system.

 

[elder999]

Coryks, that is an excellent point. I would probably sign a card to allow the vote, myself, but would vote against the union. I believe in the ballot process enough to let it go forward, but I am against these unions. The biggest most powerful unions are destroying the industries that they are in and are about to destroy the pension system.

It really doesn't happen that way-the employer authorizes the election, and can actually waive it-and often does, like in cases where 75% of the workforce returns cards, and they just want to get on with business. Often, the card IS a vote for the union-just don't sign.

There was a ruling a few years back that the Communications Workers could organize at the laboratory because our contract was held by the University of California-it's complicated. Anyway, while the union organized, and more than a few employees from all levels of the lab signed up, they never got the 50%+1 in authorizations-at something like 12000 employees, this might have taken years, and so they stuck around doing just that, trying to achieve that magic number. There was no initimidation of workers to sign the things, no real pressure-in fact, while I knew some of the people involved, I never even got given a button......of course, the contract with the lab is with a different sort of organization now, and the union went bye-bye......