Secret Ballot Protection Act

Is this the new issue? Maybe, but it has less chance of becoming law in the next two years than the horrific Employee Free Choice Act ever had. This Red State poster wants to ramp up and bludgeon "teh unions" now that votes can be forced by anti-labor forces in the House. What a waste of time. Such legislation will not get through the Senate, much less past a Presidential veto. Realistic reform might take hold if rational discussions were undertaken by both sides. Yes, the penalties for flagrant violations of the NLRA should be enhanced, even where real remedies might chill an employer a bit in its efforts to remain non-union. But in return, big labor must be willing to back off card check and permit fair secret ballot elections to determine if an un-coerced majority of workers want a union or not. No union should be imposed on a workforce without majority support established by a secret ballot determination of the majority's will.

Dead EFCA

Jane Hampsher at Firedoglake has a good post on the politics of EFCA, starring Harry, Arlen and Rahm.

EFCA in context

"Third generation union organizer" Mike Elk's piece confirming EFCA is dead started it by suggesting the EFCA battle is one with larger themes and objectives than, uh, EFCA. Then came the crying "fowl" in this post by J. Justin Wilson claiming the EFCA fight is war by proxy in "a larger conflict about political sway, public opinion, and economic ideology." One is forced to pause here and consider whether Wilson is referring to Galliformes or  Anseriformes, or as is likely, neither, but I digress. Elk retorts at Firedoglake calling Wilson "the corporate version of that creepy hit man from No Country for Old Men." Elk's position? Wilson, tool of Wall Street, needs to continue destroying unions to continue destroying the economy. You can't make this stuff up . . .

Green, Inc., green Apple

The United States Chamber of Commerce has taken quite a hit for its less than green stance on global warming. Today Apple Computer withdrew from the USCC over its position on global warming. This Blogger has long been an Apple fan because it produces insanely great products. We rationally support the USCC on the Employee Free Choice Act [EFCA], but I have children and hope to have grandchildren and failure to acknowledge climate change and failure to support solutions is no longer a rational position, irrespective of assigned cause.

Union complains about lost election

AFL-CIO blog complains again EFCA is needed because unions cannot win secret ballot elections. Commenting on the Union's loss at Blue Diamond, the writer notes a "judge" ruled the election conducted was valid, even though the union claims the company acted unfairly. Claiming that unspecified wrongdoing went "unpunished" the blogger says this is why EFCA is needed. My goodness, the union lost the election 142-353. The articles in the click thrus do not describe employer conduct that is unlawful. According to NLRB statistics unions win 55-60% of the elections conducted. Its not the process, its the product. Informed employees reject unionization. With EFCA unions want to prevent a reasonable period of time to discuss issues before employees sign a card or cast a ballot.

EFCA compromise?

Last week Senator Arlen Specter (D. Pa.) indicated he had worked out a compromise on the Employee Free Choice Act. No bill has been introduced and the details are sketchy. When I spoke at the LSU Labor and Employment seminar in March on EFCA, I predicted Labor, and its allies in Congress, could not succeed with card check recognition which deprives employees of a secret ballot election. Taking away a right to vote in a secret ballot election is a sound bite that resonates with the public and the politicians. The political solution to this impasse has already been served up by the "Bush" Board and it looks like Senator Specter is embracing that path. More after the jump.

President Supports EFCA

President Barrack Obama in a speech given at the AFL-CIO convention, proclaimed "I stand behind the Employee Free Choice Act – because if a majority of workers want a union, they should get a union."

(sigh) Before a union can gain the right to represent workers it must have demonstrable support from a majority of workers. This is so because the union becomes the representative of not only those wanting it but also the non-consenting employees who do not. The card signing portion of EFCA is strictly about what method is permitted to establish majority status. The unions want a one-sided process where they can surreptitiously convince employees to "support" the union often using heavy-handed and abusive tactics to do so. The process is fraught with concern as to whether majority status is real or coerced. We have previously posted on this problem. More after the jump.