Monthly Archives: July 2009

HOW FAR UNIONS HAVE STRAYED: EFCA arbitration provisions would strip rights from employees

“I want to urge devotion to the fundamentals of human liberty the principles of voluntarism. No lasting gain has ever come from compulsion.”

Samuel Gompers, Founder, American Federation of Labor

These were once the words and ideals of the American labor movement. How far today’s union bosses have strayed from their founder’s ideals of liberty is highlighted by their push for the Orwellian Employee Free Choice Act (or EFCA).

Not only does EFCA strip workers of choice through its no-vote unionization provision (aka card-check), we’ve also pointed out how the mind-numbingly, moronically-named bill will lead workers down the path to serfdom. However, let us reiterate:

Under the oxymoronically-named Employee Free Choice Act, once binding arbitration kicks in, if employees had been tricked into unionization (under EFCA’s no-vote unionization provision) and the government imposes its contract on the employer and employees, employees..:

1) CANNOT vote to ratify or reject the government contract

2) CANNOT modify the government contract

3) CANNOT kick the union out (for two years)

4) and, perhaps most importantly, CANNOT strike in protest.

Note: A strike is the collective withholding of labor and, if workers cannot withhold their labor, then they effectively become economic serfs.

Employees will be voiceless, powerless and left with two options: Either keep their mouths shut and accept it, or quit as individuals.

Under this Hobson’s Choice, many companies will likely lose their best and brightest employees, as individual workers realize the loss of their personal freedoms.

Now, it seems, others are picking up on EFCA’s neo-enslavement of workers under government-imposed contracts.

Erick Becker, a blogger at Examiner.com has written a good piece about EFCA’s stripping of worker rights.

As commentators have pointed out, the EFCA arbitration provisions would take the right to vote and approve or reject a contract away from employees. Also, it is possible (but unclear in the bill) that employees could lose the right to strike once the arbitration process begins.

More importantly, employees would lose the right to change their minds after bringing in a union…

If EFCA becomes law, employees who vote in a union will be subject to a contract (which will undoubtedly require mandatory payment of union dues) for at least two years, with no way of protesting or changing their minds if the contract or the union isn’t what they were promised or what they expected.

You can read the rest of Erick’s column here: EFCA arbitration provisions would strip rights from employees

As today’s union bosses lobby to move workers toward serfdom, too few realize just how far unions have strayed from their founding principles.

Posted using ShareThis

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under EFCA, Employee Free Choice Act

Suspected EFCA Compromise Could be More Fascist & Bigger Job Killer Than Original Version of Job-Destroying Bill

Last week, a story about the defectively-dubbed Employee Free Choice Act ran in the New York Times and created much hullabaloo around the internet. The Times story stated that Democrats had reportedly dropped the undemocratic majority sign-up provisions of EFCA in exchange for compromise.

Although later, SEIU boss Andy Stern downplayed the story by stating:

“The Employee Free Choice Act is going through the usual legislative process, and we expect a vote on a majority sign-up provision in the final bill or by amendment in both houses of Congress.”

However, James Redeker, an attorney at Duane Morris provides further insight about what the alleged compromise may look like [Note: we use the term alleged here because nothing has been confirmed or denied in Washington]:

The proposed deal would replace card-check provisions with an election within five to 10 days from the date of filing a petition. The National Labor Relations Board’s internal rules currently require an election within 45 days of the date of the petition. Consequently, under the modified EFCA, an employer may have little time to form an effective counter-campaign if it waits until receiving notice of the petition before
taking action. Since the deal proposes to eliminate the 12-day period (under current procedures) during which an employer can contest the appropriateness of a voting unit and the status of supervisors, unprepared employers may have to accept almost any bargaining-unit construct proposed by the union.

Other possible, but unconfirmed, aspects of the deal include a denial to employers of the right to require employees to attend meetings on work time to discuss unionization issues, a requirement that union agents be given full access to the workplace following the filing of a petition, and the right of the union to employees’ names and addresses immediately upon the filing of the petition.

The deal would leave in place mandatory arbitration to set the terms of a first contract and enhanced penalties on employers (up to $20,000 per occurrence and treble back-pay damages) that unlawfully interfere with or discriminate against employees engaged in union organizing activity.

You can read Mr. Redekker’s full post here.

If, indeed, the above rumors become confirmed fact and this is what constitutes a compromise, it will be worse than the original draft…more draconian, and more fascist.

More importantly, if this is the road America’s “leaders” choose to take our nation down, it is suspected many entrepreneurs and small business owners will abandon ship, so to speak.

There will be no incentive for any entrepreneur to invest hard-earned capital into forming a company and creating jobs when the heavy hand of government can force businesses to be handed over to a union and government bureaucracy. This, in turn, will cause larger companies to shed jobs, as higher unemployment causes less economic activity for the larger firms.

Does anyone think 17% (give or take) unemployment is unreasonable under EFCA?

Leave a comment

Filed under Andy Stern, Employee Free Choice Act, New York Times, SEIU

HuffPo Writer Blasts Bakery Workers’ Union

An interesting piece appeared on Huffington Post today about the ongoing saga of the soon-to-be-unemployed former Stella D’Oro strikers.

What makes this post interesting is the fact that it is openly critical of all the parties: the company (which is to be expected from a HuffPo writer) but the union and the workers as well got blasted in the opening paragraph:

I’m disgusted with everybody involved in the Stella D’Oro fiasco. No one gets a gold star (stella d’oro) unless it’s for incompetence. The union negotiators gang planked the 136 workers in their care right into a watery grave.

Later, the author of the piece, Dan Silverstein, writes:

Stella D’Oro’s collapse was a battle of midgets, and it didn’t have to happen. Each side overplayed its hand.

Standing in their [the company’s] way was an activist work force that felt entitled, and who became incensed when management tried to impose a plan for renewal that contradicted the evolution of nest feathering previous owners had tolerated. The union representatives were particularly outraged by the introduction of a restructured pay scale in which new workers would no longer be paid almost as much as seasoned workers. In that, they were wildly
successful; now everyone is paid exactly the same.

And, later:

But, the mind-numbing arrogance of the negotiators for the Bakery Workers Union Local 50 is particularly disturbing because it sealed the fate of the workers whose jobs they were supposed to be protecting. Obviously they thought they could arm wrestle management into caving in. What a mistake.

As stated earlier, this is a surprisingly remarkable statement to be posted on HuffPo.

To read some background to this story, go to 1-888-NO-UNION.COM’s blogpost “No Contract, No Cookies…and No Job!”

Read the entire piece: Stella D’Oro’s No-Win Solution

Posted using ShareThis

Leave a comment

Filed under 1-888-NO-UNION.COM, Bakery Workers Union, labor union strike

More on Card Check

The debate over the delusionally-dubbed Employee Free Choice Act goes on with a good post from EFCAReport.com

More on Card Check “Lite” from Commentary, kausfiles and ShopFloor

Shared via AddThis

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Newsbusters Exposes Media Bias on Employee Free Choice Act AP Report

It should come as no surpise when the media misreports issues around “card-check” legislation, otherwise known as the dubiously-dubbed Employee Free Choice Act. Well, Newsbusters.com has a good piece about on AP’s report on last week’s card-check trial balloon:

No one can finish Saturday’s report by Sam Hananel of the Associated Press without knowing the side of the political aisle on which he resides (surprise — not — it’s decidedly on the left), and that he is more sympathetic to the interests of organized labor than he is to those of management at non-union firms.

To read the entire article go here.

For more on the hallucinogencially-named Employee Free Choice Act, go to LaborUnionReport.com’s EFCA Page, or 1-888-NO-UNION.COM

Leave a comment

Filed under 1-888-NO-UNION.COM, Card-check, EFCA, Employee Free Choice Act, LaborUnionReport.com

IBD: Congress’ New Health Plan Makes Private Insurance Illegal

We have been warning for quite some time that then-candidate Barack Obama’s plan to re-engineer Amierca’s health care system would lead us into full-blown socialized medicine. Well, we hate to say ‘we told you so’, but we were right.

Investor’s Business Daily has found the page within the 1,018-page Congressional bill that outlaws you from buying private health insurance–and it’s right on page 16.

When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.

It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of “Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage,” the “Limitation On New Enrollment” section of the bill clearly states:

“Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day” of the year the legislation becomes law.

So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won’t be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.

To read the entire piece, go here.
As we’ve said all along, like it or not, socialized medicine is in the works.

Leave a comment

Filed under Barack Obama, health care, Investor's Business Daily, socialized medcine

Bally’s, Caesars dealers overwhelmingly vote to authorize strike

As we posted on Friday night, the Union of Ailing Workplaces (UAW), aka the United Auto Workers were voting over the weekend whether or not to authorize a strike. Well, according to the Press of Altlantic City, the dealers at Bally’s and slot technicians at Caesars in Atlantic City have given the green light to a walk out.

Harrah’s has stated that they are “operationally ready” and that:

“We can and we will replace dealers with either temporary or permanent workers, and will make sure that our customers continue to receive exemplary service,” Harrah’s spokeswoman Alyce Parker said. “While a temporary inconvenience for us, any potential strike will have a much more profound impact on the dealers.”

Read the entire article here: Bally’s, Caesars dealers overwhelmingly vote to authorize strike

Posted using ShareThis

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized