Senators should support Employee Free Choice Act
5/29/09 | 11 comments
guest column

Senators should support Employee Free Choice Act


Renee Overlock

I was a struggling single mom with three young children living in California. I wanted to continue working, but I couldn’t afford to pay the rent, live and take care of my kids on what I was earning from my job. Divorced, with no income from my children’s father, I was forced to quit that low-paying job and go on welfare.

After handling the bureaucracy of the state welfare system, I drew upon the values of personal responsibility and work I learned growing up in Maine. I hated not working, and I knew I needed a good job to support my children.

My aunt encouraged me to seek employment with the Postal Service, because it offered secure employment opportunities with good wages and benefits. I took the postal exams for every job offered at five separate facilities in southern California. I scored well, and I was offered a letter carrier position. I didn’t even know it was a union job, but after not being able to afford rent, and food and child care, I was grateful to be able to care for my children on my own. I still wasn’t rich, but my kids and I could survive.

After two years working for the Postal Service, I wanted to return to Maine. Because of the national contract, I was able to transfer back home, where I met and married my husband — also a letter carrier in Bangor. We were able to save for our twins to attend college for four years. They both worked while attending college, but my husband and I were able to pay their student loan payments for four years. Having them both in school at the same time was not easy, but we made it work. My husband and I would not have been able to do so without our jobs and the wages we secured through the union.

My husband and I have worked hard for the Postal Service for more than 30 years and 20 years, respectively. We remain grateful each day that we have good, secure jobs. Our family has weathered some rough times. My husband and our children have had several health issues over the years, but we have been very lucky to have excellent health coverage — coverage I am confident we would not have if we didn’t have union jobs.

As a woman, it is a relief not to worry about “glass ceilings” or being paid less than male co-workers. All letter carriers — male and female — collectively bargain for the same pay, opportunities for health care coverage and retirement benefits. We are all in this together.

I now serve as the president of the local letter carriers union in Bangor. I am not a “union boss” as advertised in commercials, but I am an advocate and resource for letter carriers. The union members I serve are not thugs, but the men and women that Bangor’s families and businesses rely on every day to deliver their mail and serve their community.

All postal employees have the choice whether they want to join a union, but all postal employees benefit from collective bargaining, whether they join or not. In Bangor, all but one of our career letter carriers belongs to the union. In Maine, 97 percent of letter carriers are members of the union. They belong because they see the value of membership, not because they are forced or intimidated to do so.

My story has a happy ending, but for too many working families the story is very different. We need to rebuild an economy that works for everyone. I strongly encourage our senators to support Mainers and women by voting for the Employee Free Choice Act. This common sense piece of legislation would give workers the freedom to join a union without intimidation and bargain collectively for better wages and benefits. I want every family to have the same opportunities mine has been blessed with having.

Renee Overlock is a letter carrier in Bangor and the president of National Association of Letter Carriers Branch 391.

Not registered? Click here
E-mail this
Print this
Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

Bangordailynews.com is pleased to offer a forum for readers to react to our stories, discuss them and provide additional information. We are reluctant to delete comments, but do reserve that right for those who abuse our forum. For more on using this site, please see our terms of service.

The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. What does that mean specifically? Here are some guidelines (see more):

Comments
11 comments on this item
On 5/28/09 at 7:43 PM, Ladyslipper wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Renee Overlock, I was so happy to read your story...it is a great one and I am happy for your success. My problem with the "employee free choice act " is .....exactly how "free" is it when the secret ballot is done away with? I feel that some folks do not care to join a the union and they should have that choice without any "pressure".

Report abuse
On 5/28/09 at 8:35 PM, chersully2000 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Renee Overlock: Thank you for sharing your personal experiences. You are a good advocate and example of why and how the Employee Free Choice Act can work very well for many workers.

Report abuse
On 5/29/09 at 9:13 AM, JosephMartin wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

WHY STOP at labor unions???

While you're at it - go ahead and enroll everyone in the Communist Party?

Who needs those pesky SECRET BALLOTS anyway???

It won't be long before we all drive the same government-approved cars,

eat the same government-approved foods,

live in the same government-approved housing,

have the same government-approved health care,

watch the same government-approved newscasts...

we might as well get used to voting the same government-approved way!!!!!

Report abuse
On 5/29/09 at 9:49 AM, Joshua wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

It is important to remember that there is a fine balance between union and business interestest that absolutely MUST be struck in each different part of our economy. While unions can be good for workers, they can also go to far. A prime contemporary example is the UAW, which just finally made huge concessions, out of fear that their livelyhood might disappear completely. There is absolutely no reason for a factory worker to be getting paid 70-80 dollars per hour (incl. benefits) with only a HS diploma. I am all for people getting their fair share, but I think that we must also remember that unions themselves can be just as greedy as the corporations. EFCA was a poorly written bill that would have done much more harm than good, unfortunately, and would certainly not have provided "free choice". The only thing it would have done is change which side is engaging in the coersion.

Report abuse
On 5/29/09 at 10:02 AM, Fair7Balanced wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Most unions, especially nurses unions, are a greedy scam that hide behing the altruism of "protecting patient care". These union leaders could care less about people, their rights, or their healthcare. All they care about is lining their own pockets and empowering socialist agendas through the likes of Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Acorn, etc. Just look at the auto industry debacle (and the collateral damage on the highly unionized cities of Detroit), paper mills, and others who supported and were controlled by the union mentality. It is not a sustainable model which ultimately subverts the entire company, industry, and/or town. Unions have contributed to the demise of our work ethic and this once great powerful nation. You can keep your Free Choice Act and let unionized, and now bankrupt, states like California have it. Stay the hell out of Maine in the meantime.

Report abuse
On 5/29/09 at 11:38 AM, kennebunkporter wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Ladyslipper, the great news is the the employee free choice act does not do away with the employees choice to have a secret ballot election if that is what the employees choose. It only takes away the employers ability to call for an election to delay the process long enough to bring in the union busters. Spread the good word!

Report abuse
On 5/29/09 at 12:23 PM, Ladyslipper wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

I'm not buying into it, kennebunkporter.

Report abuse
On 5/29/09 at 1:25 PM, GeraldWeinand wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Ladyslipper:

kennebunkporter is actually correct. If you haven't read the EFCA, I urge you to do so - it is only two pages long. You will need to familiarize yourself with the National Labor Relations Act, which the EFCA amends.

The EFCA does not in any way change how workers can organize, which includes by a secret-ballot vote should they choose to do so.

More importantly, the EFCA would do two more things, and these are the real reason why large corporations like Wal-Mart and Home Depot are opposing it:

The EFCA would force management to bargain in good faith on the FIRST contract with the new union. Currently, management often drags out negotiations for a year or more as a way of busting the union.

And the EFCA would substantially increase penalties for those found guilty of violating the NLRA. Currently, penalties are so low that many in management find it just another cost of doing business.

Report abuse
On 5/29/09 at 5:46 PM, Joshua wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Gerald, I'd wager to say that Wal Mart treats their employees far better than a great deal of the small businesses around.

Report abuse
On 5/29/09 at 6:04 PM, jesrf1 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Thank yo for such a heartfelt piece about something that you feel strongly about. I went ahead and read the Employee Free Choice Act as one poster suggested, and you were right. It doesn't do away with the secret ballot at all.

Like someone else said ladyslipper, it does mandate arbitration for a first time contract, what a wonderfule idea. If two parties cant agree, you let a neutral third party decide. Something like that would do away with costly labor strikes and employee lockouts.... its so American, I dont know why anyone would oppose it.

I dont have to vote if I want to join a private club, I just sign up if I want to, and thats what this law would allow. If everyone wants a secret ballot, it mandates that too.

It really is a fair bill, I have to admit, I had my doubts, but you've convinced me...

Renee, thank you again for sharing your wonderful story.

Report abuse
On 6/1/09 at 7:28 PM, blueskiesaboveme wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

We just need one big union. Workers of the World Unite!

Report abuse
You must be logged in to post a comment. click here to log in.

Powered by: Creative Circle Advertising Solutions, Inc.