Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Amanda Carpenter :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Card Check "Compromise"
by Amanda Carpenter
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Using words like “bipartisanship” and “compromise” President Obama may attempt a clever move to get controversial legislation passed to increase Big Labor’s control over the U.S. workforce.

It’s no secret the Orwellian-titled Employee Free Choice Act is one of the Democrats’ top priority legislative items to tackle after work on the economic stimulus bill is completed. The bill, largely recognized as a “payback” to Big Labor for their work electing Democrats during the past two election cycles, would give labor a leg-up over employers by wiping out requirements for a secret ballot election to organize workplaces in favor of a public signature (called “card-check”).

The legislation, however, has a second component just as destructive to the private sector as elimination of secret ballots. The bill would also require mandatory, binding arbitration by a federally-appointed official in case of failed agreements and dramatically increase penalties for labor law violations.

Conservative Sen. Jim DeMint (R.-S.C.), warned conservative bloggers in a conference call earlier this year he fears Democratic leadership would push both provisions to rile Republicans and then strike secret ballot language. “They could load it up to begin with and fight everyone and then pull a few things to say they’ll compromise,” DeMint said.

As he put it, Democrats could “go out with a secret ballot and be magnanimous and withdraw it. Then some Republicans may breathe a sigh of relief and vote for arbitration” which “could actually be worse in the way it slows decision making.”

This is because the arbitration process is long and complicated. Arbitration rulings in Michigan take, on average, nearly 15 months to complete, according to the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.

As currently written, the arbitration clause dictates the businesses are given a strict, 120 time period to come to an agreement with unions once negotiations begin. If no agreement is reached within the 120 day window a federal arbitrators from Washington D.C. would then come into the workplace to determine wages and benefits. Employees and employers would lose all negotiating power at that point.

If labor officials did not like the way negotiations were heading during those 120 days, they would have the option of waiting it out to have the federal arbitrators settle compensation agreements. This scenario is considered Big Labor’s “trump card,” since a federal arbitrators is likely to be more sympathetic to labor’s priorities, especially under the Obama Administration.

EFCA critics, like DeMint, insist this “trump card” threatens workplaces just as much as the elimination of secret ballots and eliminating that provision is no compromise. And, it looks like he may be right about Obama’s strategy.

President Obama indicated he would be willing to “tweak” the existing, two-part legislation to make it more acceptable to the business community in a recent interview with the Washington Post.

“I will certainly listen to all parties involved including from labor and the business community which I know considers this to be the devil incarnate,” Obama said. “I will listen to parties involved and see if there are ways that we can bring those parties together and restore some balance. You know, now if the business community's argument against the Employee Free Choice Act is simply that it will make it easier for people to join unions and we think that is damaging to the economy then they probably won't get too far with me. If their arguments are we think there are more elegant ways of doing this or here are some modifications or tweaks to the general concept that we would like to see. Then I think that's a conversation that not only myself but folks in labor would be willing to have.”

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Amanda Carpenter is the author of “The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy's Dossier on Hillary Clinton,” published in October 2006.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Amanda Carpernter. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Card Check
The unions are salivating at the thought of being able to intimidate more workers into signing the cards and getting more union members than they would get through the secret ballot. Is it any stretch of the imagination to believe that the unions won't send out a bunch of thugs to make sure every worker makes the "correct" choice? After all, the unions know where the workers live and where their kids go to school. What worker would be able to resist the pressure when some thug is standing in front of him making subtle threats against his family? I don't for a minute believe that businesses would resort to such tactics, but unions are known for that.

card check
the unions by their very nature are corrupt in that they force members to pay dues and then the unions leaders use them to keep themselves in power and to generate millions in donations to the dims party.

We have already seen the bailout given to gm and chrysler as nothing more than payback to keep the unions in power within the auto industry.

Now the dims think that removing the secret ballot is the way to pay back the unions for the hundreds of millions they have given to the dims.

If the unions are such wondrous organizations why do they need this new fraudulent legislation to grow their ranks.

That socialist b hussein fully buys into this madness shows again his hatred of capitalism and his love of tghese parasite unions and proves that like the dims, the messiah can be bought and paid for by any group giving him money.

The unions have bought the messiah and this is his way to pay them back, no matter that the only group that benefits are the corrupt union leaders

B.Hussein,Magician
The -sleight- of -hand magician at work. Now you see it...now you don't.What you see is NOT what you get.

Votes
All good COMMUNIST don't care for secret ballots.They won't know who to persecute !!!

This sounds familiar.
Does anyone remember the bayonet lug provision in Clinton's Criminal Bill in 1994? It was put in solely to be taken out and reduce the number of disqualifying features from three to two.

How about ...
another provision where if the company fails because it cannot afford the unions demands, then we can sue the Federal Government for all lost wages, benefits and health care until retirement age. With decisions there should be responsiblity, right Obama?

Let the Unions send their thugs
Because in some places those thugs won't go back to the hall in the same condition they arrived in.

Republicans Need to Stand Firm
Union abuses have practically ended manufacturing in the Northeast. This is the Democrats way of punishing states like Texas and North Carolina where Right to Work laws are in place and their economies are thriving.

Wolves in the sheepfold
Hey Mac, you should look at the fences, especially those on the back side of the barn. That hired hand who you trust so much has been sneaking out at night and in the dark has been tearing the fences down.
No, he is a good trusting man, I've know him for many years. Are you saying he is undermining my farm, that he is a wolf?
No Mac, I am not saying that however look at his ears.

I am modestly pro-union
My dad was an inside agitator and one of the guys on the line back in the 1930s, so I sympathize with union workers. Without what my dad and his friends did back then, many of the workplace rules we currently have would not exist -- little things like, yes, your boss really does have to pay you what he contracted on a regular pay day and, yes, safety issues in the workplace must be addressed in a timely manner. Thank an old union member if you have Saturdays and Sundays off and a paid vacation, can buy into a company health care bill, or have a retirement account through your employer. All union innovations.

The check card system has been used for decades to poll interest in union representation preparatory to a secret-ballot election. It's not new. What is new is the idea that it should be the determination for actual membership. People do get intimidated when faced with a strident coworker insisting this is the best thing for the company and the employees. I've felt that intimidation myself, though I still refused to sign the check-card and told the person that they blew it by trying to intimidate me. OTOH, I gave serious consideration to my vote as I entered the poll station. That's where people can make choices without influence from others and there's nothing wrong with agreeing to go union if that will be better for you. IF???????

Which is why, though I have union sympathies, I very much disagree with replacing secret-ballot elections with the check-card system.

What is more elegant (Mr. President Obama) than holding a workplace election in the same way that we hold our political elections? The check-card is expediency and it invites intimidation. There's a reason we hold secret elections at all levels in this country. Maybe you should have studied that before you became President.

This is the first step...
Comrade Obama and his fellow travelers will take toward their socialist-communist utopia they want to forge for America.

One argument they like to use is that this Force Choice Act would make it easier for "employees" to unionize. They have it backwards. All this act does is make it easier for unions to force employees into unions and pay dues and adhere to draconian work rules.

Another Ayn Rand book I would recommend is "We The Living." It's about the early days of communist Russia and how the people have to rely on government for jobs, housing, and just about everything else. That's the direction Comrade Obama wants to take us.

HaHa
meet your new union shop steward....Tony Soprano

Liberals often will mis-name legislation

This is very common for Liberals in Congress to misname a piece of legislation.

They do this because their constituency is not as well educated as the general population.

Unions
This "card check" is my pet peeve, taking away our most precious right, the right to a private ballot. They can defend this all they want, the open ballot is there for one reason, to intimidate the person who doesn't want a union in their workplace. The thug tactics that the union uses to get you to vote their way is simliar to another group who uses the same thug tactics and also has 5 letters in there name, "MAFIA"

Kill the auto industry
Between the new environmental--can you imagine complying with 50 different sets of rules (use gasoline as an example with each state having various regulations) costs an additional 10 cents per gallon and will cost thousands per car. All you union liberals who voted for the nobama man can kiss your jobs good-bye.

Union rules
Interesting that the states with the strongest unions and liberal policies are all going bankrupt, and are rife with corruption--CA MI IL NY--need I say more and this is the direction nobama is taking you.

Obama doesn't like secret ballot.
That was they key to his Democratic nomination. He won in the caucus states, starting with Iowa, where the ballots weren't secret, and lost most primary states with the secret ballot. He's bad for business and this Obama recession is the result of the smart money getting out last fall as his regime looked more likely.

Union stories
I'm sure this is minor in the big picture, but indicative:

My son had a JV basketball game and the ref's ran the clock during the time outs and when the ball went out of bounds. When people complained one ref unabashidly told the spectators that this was a union job and the same refs did the freshman game and they're not supposed to have to work two games in a row, so they were making the game go as fast as possible. Now that's cold..

Politics 101
The poor, govt employees, unemployed, victimized, and plaintiff lawyers vote Democrat. The rich, charitable, well-educated, and independent vote Republican.
Both parties govern as to increase their number of voters.

roy will be by- be patient
Illinos roy with the run on sentences with little, if any, punctuation will be by. Be patient.He will just not be able to resist telling us that unions are good and rush and joe the plumber have been on welfare before. He will start by calling us einstein or aristotle before he lapses into useless, tired, broken record drivel.

Politics 101
You ARE kidding....right?

Ken - Fiction More than Fact
Your listing of voting constituencies by party is rooted in stereotype and bears little resemblence to the truth/current reality. Gore, Obama, and Kerry all got a majority of voters with college degrees, and Obama also won a majority of voters with incomes above $100k.

Too often what inhibits the conversation on Townhall (as well as on similar liberal sites) is the characterization of the other side in ways that fill some need or psychic hole in the poster, but don't begin to match reality.

Regarding "Card Check" and it's dangers/flaws--I'll draw an analogy to abortion. If conservatives really wanted to reduce the number of abortions, they'd support what has been proven to be most effective in limiting them--information about, and access to, birth control. But they oppose that.

It's the same with unions. If people who opposed unions wanted to reduce their number/influence, they'd make workplace conditions better so that workers wouldn't see the benefits of having a union. But they don't, and they they whine when their workers vote their best interests. And with Card Check, if those who oppose unions didn't want this to pass, they'd make it easier to have secret ballot elections at their workplaces--but they don't.

I agree that Card Check seems like a bad idea--but the key to beating it is to absolutely avoid the kind of talk about unions, liberals, etc that is the heart of what you hear from the folks on this thread in particular and Townhall in general. Simple, rational, factual explanations of the dangers of it, and emphasis of the fact that workers already have a legit way to vote in union authorizing elections, is the way to go. Talk about union goons and dishonest liberals, and you automatically become a conservative trog who deserves to lose--and you will.

Bruce
very good comment. Rational, well thought-out, accurate and true.

Prepare to be bashed.

big labor's control?
Are people so ignorant that they have no idea that unions have lost virtually all of their power in the last 30 years? If an Obama presidency means that we have a work force as unionized as we had in 1990, why would that be such a disaster? I thought unions had too much control in 1980 -- I cannot say they have too much power now -- especially since wages for so many people have been stagnant. You need to have a requisite level of knowledge to understand this point -- I do not think that this author has that level.

Bruce
We don't need to have to explain anything. Everyone is entitled to a secret ballot regardless of whether they understand the consequences of their actions or not.
On the topic of abortion-the fact is that abortion terminates life so your whining about information and birth control don't change the fact that murder is murder. There is plenty of information and I believe that most if not all kids know where babies come from. Maybe if we told them to keep it in their pants and if we all taught our daughters to respect themselves enough to refuse sex with some pimpled teenage boy then we would really make the difference...But being a clueless liberal you have no clue how life really works...

Mr. President, you're stepping in doo do
Why even bother to meet with the Rep's? Are you afraid of Pelosi or don't you really mean what you say?
No Rep vote? Big Mistake, big!

PresidentialBalls.com


Employee Free Choice Now . Org
Employee Free Choice Now . Org
Educating The World on The EFCA.

Myth vs. Reality: The REALITY is the Employee Free Choice Act Helps American Workers and their Families.

Despite the need for reform, critics of EFCA continue to misinform the public about the bill and hide the serious shortcomings of current labor law. Democrats are committed to setting the record straight and passing this important legislation on behalf of American workers and their families.

MYTH: EFCA will prevent the use of secret-ballot elections.

REALITY: EFCA does not strip workers of their right to choose a secret-ballot election to decide whether to select -- or not to select -- a union representative. EFCA simply gives workers the additional option of selecting a union representative by majority sign-up.


For More Information on EFCA please visit our website and blog

http://www.employeefreechoiceactnow.org

http://efcanow.blogspot.com/

http://www.LaborUnionResources.Org

http://www.spfpa.org/UnionBusterPagemakerBrochure.pdf

http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/dmdocuments/ARAWReports /UROCUEDcompressedfullreport.pdf

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1132/is_n2_v46/ai_15 515998/pg_1?tag=artBody;col1


arrogant leftist trolls
I love the way leftist invade conservative boards....paid by Georgy Soros I'm sure...spew BS without any documentation or valid support for their BS commentary and then assume the conservatives are as gullable as their pals and parrots. If the leftist voters are so darn intellectual and uber successful, why do so many screw up with simple things like say using a voting machine or holding a job? People relying on the guv for a paycheck vote left...people hoping to get some of their more successful neighbors money vote left. People that have no clue about how the government works seem to vote left...lawyers needing new laws vote left. Profs wanting the status quo vote left....the educated management class and professional class vote right except for the tied to the government tit types already mentioned. If indeed all these educated people vote leftist along with all the minoritys as well as the labor class vote left apparently only 12 people vote Republican.

Joe, you union hack moron
Why would a union go to a costly, but fair, secret ballot election when they can just coerce individuals into signing a card? Just because a right exists in law does not mean that one will ever be given the right to exercise it, especially if those in control of it stand to lose if the right is exercised.

Get a clue!
I sure would like to own a buisiness in a right to work state. First thing I would do is get real selective on who gets a job, like maybe , only college grads. Then I would set up a series of work rules that only benefitted me. How about to get your full pay you have to work 7 days a week, any time off reduces your hourly pay by 10% per each day off. No over time! No med insurance! No paid holidays! Oh ya, no time off the job for breaks in your 10 hour work cycle. Now if I don't like your attitude, go find another job and by the way you don't get paid for your time you worked this week. Don't like it, hire a lawyer. I'd rather have a UNION.

the influence of big labor...
has waned except in 2 places-- among teachers and other govt. workers... what does that tell you? Only those who can force the public to eat their higher costs via taxes (or stamps) can get along with a union. Postal clerks make TWICE what their private counterparts make and with far better benefits. And here is a dirty little secret-- teachers are NOT underpaid for their educational level, and that is even before you factor in the immense time off.

Labor unions perhaps did some good things decades ago, but as the Greeks said, everything in moderation. More recently, unions have served to kill their golden gooses. We cannot pay lightly skilled (and easily trained) UAW members $150k all-in to make cars that when non-union workers are glad to make Toyota's in Ky. for half that.

Make no mistake,
the overriding reason labor is pushing for card check is to unionize the 1.6 million Walmart employees. After Walmart, all the other BigBox store employees will fall in line. You heard it here first.

about union influence...
At their peak 50 years ago, unions represented about 1 worker in 3... today they represent less than 10%. It is NOT that their message does not get heard-- it is that workers can see the jobs going overseas and the union expense, abuse and corruption.

A good argument could be made that anybody paid by the taxpayer (teachers, civil servants, postal workers) should be banned from being in a union.

It is also comical that airline pilots can make over $200k a year strictly due to union corporate blackmail. The argument that they have a responsible job is vacuous-- there are 5 million commercial flights (many by pilots trained in 3rd world countries) between deaths around the world... one is at much more risk on the cab ride to the airport. They work a couple of days a week-- tough job.

Unions are a textbook example of "group think"-- let's all tell each other that we are collectively abused and soon we will have the mentality of lemmings.

To John D
If you set up a company like that, no one would work there, and you'd fail. Free market at work.

You would have a point if your company was the only one in town and no one could leave the town to work elsewhere. That's why unions were necessary during the Industrial Revolution. They are worthless now.

There is a union picketing a hotel near where I work. I laugh at them whenever I go by. They ask me why I'm laughing at people who are being down-trodden by "the establishment." I tell them that they are too stupid to see that the hotel next door (which is not being picketed, so must be better) is hiring.

John D is delusional
If you set up a company like that, no one would work there, and you'd fail. Free market at work.

You would have a point if your company was the only one in town and no one could leave the town to work elsewhere. That's why unions were necessary during the Industrial Revolution. They are worthless now.

There is a union picketing a hotel near where I work. I laugh at them whenever I go by. They ask me why I'm laughing at people who are being down-trodden by "the establishment." I tell them that they are too stupid to see that the hotel next door (which is not being picketed, so must be better) is hiring.

oracle1
Excuse me, but I don't follow your rationale that a cab ride to the airport is more dangerous than putting yourself in the hands of a trained airline pilot. I agree with that analysis, but then you seem to say that pilots are overpaid. Are you saying that pilots should make no more than the cab driver who drove you to the airport? What am I missing here? Just askin'. BTW, I don't know what Sully Sullenberg's salary is, but it ain't enough.

oracle1 wrote
"A good argument could be made that anybody paid by the taxpayer (teachers, civil servants, postal workers) should be banned from being in a union."

Easily exampled in neighbouring Canuckistan, where there are several unions (CUPE for most government employees, CUPW specifically for Canada Post "workers"). I cannot remember a single year between 1977 and 1993 when both of these together failed to call a strike. In 1987, I actually saw the absurd-sounding action by CUPW of strking for job-security!

(an attempt at humour: "How do you tell when Canada Post is on strike--they were the ones who put the 'snail' into 'snail-mail'!")

reply to: michigander
If you talk to union pilots and ask them why senior captains earn $200k+ (many would do that job for 1/3 as much) they tell you that they have heavy responsibility for lives... my point was that lives are more at risk in the cab ride than on the flight... this is surely true statistically. As Superman says, statistically it is the safest way to travel.

Pilots typically get their training in the military, so they do not even pay for that, nor do they need any advanced degree. Their unions require that they stay in 4* hotels downtown and ride in limos when there are hotels at the airport... the group think abuses abound and enervate the airlines-- and the rest of pay for it via an effective oligopoly.

Unions
When they face pay cuts courtesy of the new administration under the cover of openness do not object.

the P.O. is losing $...
... why am I not surprised?!

http://townhall.com/news/politics-elections/2009/01/29/post master_general_mail_days_may_need_to_be_cut

Their union driven costs are twice what their counterparts get... but who do you go to when timely delivery is essential?! Picture yourself in a long line at the P.O. when one of the 2 clerks announces as he closes his window-- Well, it is time for my break. Union, monopoly mentality all the way.

tabau
things are backwards as usual. political voting should not be secret, so when the election criminals try to change a vote, the voter can say, no, this is the way i voted, not the way the criminals want to say i voted. on the other hand, union certification votes should be secret, so that union criminals cannot force people to sign a card against their wishes. naturally, we will have it backwards, since democratic criminals are in charge.

aurorawatcher
Under the current law the employer can recognize card check if he wishes. However, he can demand an election. The problem is that employers can drag on the election process for long periods. Once the election is won they can also drag on the contract negotiations for a long period. In both cases they can uses various tactics to intimidate the workers. By the way, as JOE points out, the workers may still request an election.
http://www.dmiblog.com/archives/2006/10/union_busting_101_a t_pace_univ.html

As for why join a union:
http://www.carpenters.org/join/benefits_2.html

Get your facts right
Amanda if you are going to write an article you should at least get your facts correct. Under EFCA, as presently drafted, Labor and Management have 120 days to negotiate a contract. If they are unsuccessful then they are required to use a Federal MEDIATOR from the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. A mediator, unlike an arbitrator, has NO power or authority to force anybody to do anything!!!!

Only if after 30 days of mediation there is no contract then the parties are required to submit the negotiations to a private, NOT FEDERAL, arbitrator who would have the power to impose a decision.

Watch government continue its growth
with card check. Government workers grew in number even in this year of recession and will continue to grow at a faster rate with card check. Then we can be like France shutting down the country as they march for better wages.

Union Card Check VS ??
I think we all know exactly what the Union Reps have on their minds and it's spelled WALMART!!
I spent almost 1/4 Century in Military Svc and for most of those I and people like me, was the UNION between the GIs & "Company Grade Officers.
At least, that's how we saw it..Then I spent 22 years as a Union Member.. Ifthose people ever did anything for me, except DEMAND PAC $$ I don't know what it was.. A few pay raises, Increased Union Dues, GO FIGGER!! I suspect the Waltons will have the last word.. CHEERS!!

For oracle 1
on your reply to granholm-fan michigander, "Their unions require that they stay in 4* hotels downtown and ride in limos when there are hotels at the airport... the group think abuses abound and enervate the airlines-- and the rest of pay for it via an effective oligopoly."

Also, notice that the airport hotels (not as many airports in US as in Canada have attached hotels, but that's beside the point) oft turn out to be at least 3.5* or 4*--definitely the case with DTW-Marriott and Calgary's Delta Airport.

sjpatejak
I grew up in a union household and my husband is a current union member. We've stood two union elections at the agency where I work (during the last 10 years). I think I have a black belt in union organization and mostly from the pro side of it.

During both of those elections, our employer was very gracious and made no known attempt to subvert the organizing process, other than insisting on a secret-ballot election rather than accepting the check-cards. In both instances, my coworkers made attempts to intimidate others into voting for the union. Both times, I was subject to intimidation -- reminders that my job might become a lot more difficult if I didn't vote "with the majority". The first time I was willing to sign the check-card to show my interest until the intimidation started. The second time, I went public with the intimidation and was flooded with emails from coworkers who felt the same way but had signed the check-card to get the recruiting coworker off their back. The first election was an agency-wide failure. The second election was run by units and one of our units went union. The union was absolutely "shocked" both times that they didn't win the whole agency. The check-cards said they would. What happened? Freedom happened. Secrecy happened. You can't be singled out for your "no" vote if nobody knows which way you voted.

Believe me, it takes a special kind of guts to look at coworker in the eye after they've told you that your job is going to be harder if you don't sign it and say "NO, I won't!" It takes an even larger amount of intestinal fortitude to do that five times, which one of my coworkers did. Her dad is a BA here in town; she's very pro-union. She's also very anti-intimidation. Her job was made a great deal more difficult after her unit went union.

To a union membe 1
You oppose my Total Tax Reform plan called “One Tax And Done”. Do you really enjoy paying much more for everything than you should have to pay; and do you enjoy seeing many union jobs taxed out of existence? There is something that you haven’t considered:

It is your duty to sell the plan. It is your duty and responsibility to your union, to go to your union meetings and remind the other members that they pay a lot of money to the union as dues, and that a lot of that dues money (how much?) is given by the union bosses to state and federal Democrat-party politicians to keep them in office. Your union bosses don’t give any money to Republican-party politicians.

It is also your duty to remind the membership that these Democrat-party politicians are constantly passing more and higher taxes, some of which are to be used to give an additional 845 billion dollars to the UN. These taxes have forced and continue to force many tens of thousands of employers out of business, out of the state, and out of the country, along with all the many jobs these employers provided. This is called outsourcing, and taxes are one of the main reasons for it. Hershey’s closing of the Luden’s Candy factory where Mom worked is a good example of this. Luden’s is a union shop, and the union jobs are going to Mexico, India, and Red China, thanks to all the destructive taxes the Democrat-party politicians passed and increased.

These same Democrat-party politicians are also trying to get amnesty for the many millions of illegal aliens, so they can take jobs presently held by long-term union members. Ask members of construction unions, who have already lost their jobs to illegal aliens, about this. The politicians you are paying to keep in office are taxing millions of union jobs out of existence, and are trying to get illegal aliens into others.


To a union member 2
Remember that, in 1990, these Democrat-party federal-level politicians greatly increased these taxes to force tens of thousands of employers to put millions of Americans out of jobs, to anger the people and get President Bush out of office. In 1991, the democrat-controlled PA state government did the same for no apparent reason other than “they could”. How many union members lost their jobs? Did the politicians ask for union permission to destroy jobs? All union members are paying the politicians to cut union members’ throats!!!

You must get the membership to send the local union boss to the state union boss and to the national union boss. The state and national bosses should go to the state bosses and national bosses of all the other unions. All the union bosses should go to the state and federal politicians to tell them that they will not get any more money, support, and votes until they repeal all these destructive, union-job-destroying taxes and get rid of the illegal aliens who are taking union jobs. If they don’t repeal the taxes and deport the illegal aliens, use the primary election to give your support to a candidate who will.

At this time, the state and national bosses can give copies of “One Tax And Done” and “How To Get Rid of Illegal Aliens” to each politician. I’ll follow this letter with state and federal versions of it. You probably haven’t thought about it, but if all those taxes had been repealed by 1946, we would have one of the best railroad systems in the world, and you wouldn’t have to worry that Amtrak might go under and your job might not last for ten more years – a concern you’ve expressed to me. The money that these taxes take from Amtrak is needed by Amtrak to stay in business and provide jobs; and the jobs taken by illegal aliens are needed by you and your union brothers.

Just to make things clear!
We're not talking about mob-like goons from the union coming to do this intimidation. We're talking about coworkers -- people you otherwise like and respect -- who won't stop talking about it. They nitpick every concern you might have about a union, including the sort of union you're joining, since there's no "behavioral health" union, so you're being recruited by the Teamsters and the Meatpackers unions (no, I am not kidding, and yes, the representation has been, uh, lacking since the MP union won). They then start with character assassination. You aren't really a team-player all of a sudden. You must be wanting to become management. Your husband is already in a union so you don't need good health insurance (don't use my husband's health insurance, I have my own). You're a conservative so you are ideologically opposed to worker's rights (Uh, Dad was an inside agitator for the union; what???) And, then there comes the sly or not-so-sly message that you will no longer be a respected coworker if you don't vote the way they want.

Dad said he preferred to charm people into organizing, but trust me, I have about a dozen coworkers who weren't that charming when we were considering organization here.

The secret-ballot election protects workers' right to vote their conscience. I know quite a few companies that have looked at organizing and the employees in all of them have said that the only intimidation their employers ever indulged in was the truth -- that if wages and health insurance costs go up because of organizing, they would be forced to cut positions. That's the reality of doing business; you can't afford to keep as many employees if the cost of those employees goes up and the productivity and profit-potential goes down.

Bruce - contraception education
Your post was good, which is why I decided it needs a response because some of your assertions are incorrect.

Most of the conservatives I know do not object to our children learning about contraception as part of sex ed. What we object to is the focus.

There are essentially two ways you can teach sex ed. One is to emphasize abstinence as the best way to prevent pregnancy and disease-transmission, but if you choose not to be abstinent, there are alternatives to unprotected sex. The other is to say "since you're going to have premarital sex and if you don't, there's something wrong with you, here are some contraceptives and let me show you how to use them."

Do you see the difference? Please don't claim that this isn't how it is taught, because I've got experience with it both as a student and as an adult and now, as a parent. The pregnancy and STD rate of our school district climbed steadily during the years when the second scenario was the norm. Then we switched to abstinence-based education (abstinence-only is a misnomer, they didn't even teach that in my daughter's Christian school curriculum). The pregnancy and STD rate has been slowly declining since that time.

Why? Well, one assumes that sex is something you CAN'T control and then relies on teenagers to make healthy choices about protecting themselves. The other assumes the sex is a controllable human activity that comes with responsibility, but recognizes that not every kid is going to be self-controlled.

I know only a handful of conservatives who want their kids to be ignorant of contraception. I know a great deal many who want them to be well-informed, but the emphasis on making smart choices rather than hedonistic ones.

Bruce - contraception education
Your post was good, which is why I decided it needs a response because some of your assertions are incorrect.

Most of the conservatives I know do not object to our children learning about contraception as part of sex ed. What we object to is the focus.

There are essentially two ways you can teach sex ed. One is to emphasize abstinence as the best way to prevent pregnancy and disease-transmission, but if you choose not to be abstinent, there are alternatives to unprotected sex. The other is to say "since you're going to have premarital sex and if you don't, there's something wrong with you, here are some contraceptives and let me show you how to use them."

Do you see the difference? Please don't claim that this isn't how it is taught, because I've got experience with it both as a student and as an adult and now, as a parent. The pregnancy and STD rate of our school district climbed steadily during the years when the second scenario was the norm. Then we switched to abstinence-based education (abstinence-only is a misnomer, they didn't even teach that in my daughter's Christian school curriculum). The pregnancy and STD rate has been slowly declining since that time.

Why? Well, one assumes that sex is something you CAN'T control and then relies on teenagers to make healthy choices about protecting themselves. The other assumes the sex is a controllable human activity that comes with responsibility, but recognizes that not every kid is going to be self-controlled.

I know only a handful of conservatives who want their kids to be ignorant of contraception. I know a great deal many who want them to be well-informed, but the emphasis on making smart choices rather than hedonistic ones.

'Crats and ILLEGALS
re:
"These same Democrat-party politicians are also trying to get amnesty for the many millions of illegal aliens, so they can take jobs presently held by long-term union members. Ask members of construction unions, who have already lost their jobs to illegal aliens, about this. The politicians you are paying to keep in office are taxing millions of union jobs out of existence, and are trying to get illegal aliens into others."
________________________________________

No question about it-- liberal pols see future voters among the millions of ILLEGAL aliens. This is why Gov. Spitzer wanted to give them drivers' licenses and Shrillary shot herself in the foot by not comprehending the wrath of most New Yorkers... the remote rich do not feel threatened by ILLEGALS-- they LIKE the cheap (albeit ILLEGAL) housekeeping and yardwork.

It is funny how all democrats
accuse Republicans with hate and fear mongering by spreading hate and fear mongering.

unions
the obama administration and efca proponents are being very clever in regards to this piece of legislation.shoot the moon and then maybe settle for what they really want.see the problem has never been the secret ballot.the problem has been the long delays in the vote.even if this gets filibustered in the senate and killed,all they need to do is have the new labor secretary change the rules and require that the vote be held in 3 days or a week.this will be sufficient to unionize a lot of businesses including wal-mart.

Chad
You must mean Mario. Have you noticed how on thread after thread he comes and writes how conservatives are this evil or that evil and how very hateful we are, but then says he's trying to teach us not to hate any longer.

Of course, if you get tired of him, there's Chloe, same tune, different verse.

part 2
and then when it looks like the obama administration has maybe caved and can't get this passed,they will gain concessions from mcconnell and the rest of the republicans on some other legislation important to the obama agenda.then he will have his labor secretary change the rules to require votes be held swiftly.say a week instead of 6 months or 9 months or never.

There is another way . . .
to "have your cake and eat it too". I would be willing to go along with "card check" legislation if it is coupled with "national right to work" legislation. Although this would give unions more power, it would also give the INDIVIDUAL the ultimate say in whether to join a union. I have personal experience in losing TWO JOBS because of "forced" union membership. Michigan, being an "agency shop" state, forces union "membership" on those who would be better off without union "representation". I had superior skills (that my company recognized) which made NO difference to the union; I had lesser "seniority" therefore I was let go with detrimental effect to the company. Yes, I know about the Beck decision; getting the union to go along with it is extremely difficult.

tj
if you were that valuable your company could have made you part of management.that happens all the time in union shops.

Roy
Thanks for the comment. The union "contract" that applied to my situation was that ANY work that I did (in my "job classification") had to be done by a member of the "bargaining unit". Most union "contracts" prohibit "management" from doing "bargaining unit work" unless it is to provide "instruction to bargaining unit members". Attempts to create another "job classification" to accommodate me were rebuffed by the "union". Let's face it, unions (sometimes) advocate mediocrity on the altar of "seniority". I am not anti-union--some companies actually prefer the structure of a union contract because it can be used to delineate responsibilities of both union members and management.

PS I have worked on both ends of the union bureaucracy, both as a "union member" and "union steward".

tj
i hear ya-i've been on both sides too.we had a shop steward who was ask by management to be a supervisor.he took it and was the best supervisor i've ever worked for. mainly because he knew what it was like to be on the other side.all you had to do was your job and he left you alone.he sure beat some snot nosed kid just out of college that was just basically a glorified baby sitter.

My husband's experience
He's a union electrician, but started out in merit shops -- came in as an organized hand about 10 years ago. He was trained that you work as fast as you can safely work because every cost overrun is a hit in the profits of your company and that might mean they can't keep as many electricians working, which might mean you're going to lose your job. He was brought up to believe in a teamwork relationship between management and workers.

Then he joined the union. He was shocked to see electricians -- even foremen -- sandbagging jobs, forcing cost overruns, and even ordering electricians to do shoddy work so that it would fail inspection and need to be redone thus keeping the job going longer. He was told outright by union electricians to SLOW DOWN. He's watched crews bring on additional workers because they "couldn't possibly do it with so few workers" when in reality he could have done the work in view in half the time if the foreman hadn't told him not to. Even slowed down, he still gets complaints that he works too fast, but it's a habit that's hard for him to break.

I am still (mostly) pro-union (I loved my father, the union organizer), but I think they're shooting themselves in the foot by demanding higher and higher wages without producing greater profits. Sooner or later (and we're seeing it now) companies can't continue to support drags on their profits. If they can't decertify the unions, they go out of business and that's not good for their workers.

John D
Alaska is a right-to-work state. I've worked, briefly, for a couple of employers who thought they could get away with your scenario. I quit and so did every other employee. Those businesses no longer exist.

Free market at work. If you aren't a good employer, you won't have good employees. If you aren't a good employee, you won't have many opportunities to work. Unless, of course, you're in a union, when your "brothers" will protect you even if you're a lousy worker.

Being as you're from MI, I guess you've never actually worked in a right-to-work state. You might want to try it sometime. Not in Alaska, of course, because we don't need anymore union workers who slow the jobs down and strangle business profits because they fail to understand that what's good for your employer is, within reason, good for you the employee. Every company I've worked for -- higher profits always translated into higher wages and lower profits always translated into layoffs. It's called free market reality. And, yes, this is a right-to-work state!

oracle1, you wrote
"...my point was that lives are more at risk in the cab ride than on the flight... this is surely true statistically."

So what? You've still lost me with your tortured analogy. Whether or not the pilot got free training in the military is irrelevant. The fact remains that HE HAS THE TRAINING, and it has a value. Your claim that senior pilots are overpaid fails to impress me when I see forklift operators at General Motors pulling down $85,000 per year (and my tax dollars are being used to keep them afloat).

reply to: michigander
Try it this way-- what do you suppose airline pilots would earn with no union-- if they had to negotiate their compensation in a free market like other college grads such as bankers, without the threat of 2 guys keeping a $20 million aircraft on the ground, the real reason they make so much (corporate blackmail).

The answer is indubitably FAR LESS than they extort via a union. As for training, an M. Deity spends many years and tons of personal $ paying for an education-- pilots usually get their training at taxpayer expense while officers in the military. The very safety record of flying belies the claim of great responsibility-- it obviously is not all that dangerous at the end of the day, and it is a GREAT workstyle.

oracle1
You keep harping on the pilots getting free training, which has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand. In fact, a good case can be made that the training wasn't free at all. After all, the guy/gal gave up at least four years of civilian life to serve the country, not to mention that a goodly number of them were in combat risking their lives. So let's get off the "free training" mantra.

You ask how much pilots would earn if they were non-union. You say much less. Maybe, maybe not. Most doctors and lawyers are non-union. Are they cheap? Shister lawyers and quack doctors are probably a little cheaper, which makes one wonder what the overall quality of airline pilots would be if the companies were allowed to hire the lowest bidders with the minimum required training. Ask the passengers who were on the plane that landed on the Hudson River a few weeks ago what they think of the highly-trained pilot who pulled it off. Ask them if they'd trade him for a non-union, minimumly-trained pilot if they had it to do over.

forget the free training
Could an airline pilot possibly make anywhere remotely near $200k with exceptional benefits as well without union blackmail?! the usual arguments why M. Dieties can command healthy incomes is that it takes a long time to get their education and they accept life and death responsibility. An airline pilot simply does what the military trained him to do-- and he was being paid as an officer in the process.

At the end of the day, veteran airline pilots make what they make not so much because of unique skill set, or years committed to education and training, or because of unusual responsibility (commercial crashes are EXTREMELY rare) but because they ban together in a union and artificially force far higher wage scales than their training and responsibility would call for in a free market. The airlines lose $ and go under because of such excesses, and the consumer subsidizes it, especially in smaller markets.

I am the son of a career Air Force Colonel, Command Pilot, and Flight Instructor... the military would let people go who sometimes tripled their compensation in fairly short order.

EFCA is Needed to Right Past Wrongs
In a compelling essay entitled: “The State of the Unions” (NYT 12/07), Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman details the aggressive anti-union campaign launched by business in the mid-1970s to undermine New Deal labor legislation. A far more detailed analysis by Professor Gordon Lafer of the University of Oregon, “Neither Free Nor Fair” (7/07) details the particulars of anti-union tactics as they pertain to the denial of workers’ free speech, subjecting union advocates to economic coercion and intimidation, defamation of union sympathizers, the subverting of the electoral process via delaying tactics and the failure to bargain in good faith in the event that union recognition is achieved.

While peer pressure in the card check process is real, the need to redress the very serious shortcomings which now beset union efforts to represent workers make it the lesser of two evils. In an environment where workers have no reasonable expectation of having their rights protected there is no other choice. To quote Lafer: “NLRB elections fail to safeguard workers’ right to keep their opinions private; and that, on the contrary, the NLRB system results in workers being forced to revel their political preferences long before they step into the voting booth- thus turning the secret ballot into a mockery of democratic process.”

community organizers
Once upon a time a community organizer was code for a union organizer or a communist organizer; about the same thing most of the time.

Young Barry, who is so spoiled that his FIRST job could be nothing less than President of the United States, wants to seize the assets of the corporations and give the plunder to the 'poor.' Powerfull unions are a good hand in the effort to throttle and plunder the corporations.

Watch out for young Barry. He will quickly turn into a 'benevolent' dictator. His models are Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, Lenin and Joe Stalin.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.