The Employee Free Choice Act, a proposed federal law that would change the way unions can be formed in the private sector, is casting an odd and confusing shadow over the Tom Allen-Susan Collins Senate race. Rep. Allen, the Democratic challenger, is an original co-sponsor of the measure. Sen. Collins, the incumbent Republican, opposes the legislation. Third party groups, the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace and Employee Freedom, have paid for TV ads criticizing Rep. Allen for supporting the bill. The coalition’s ad features an actor who played a mobster on the HBO series “The Sopranos.” Both Rep. Allen and Sen. Collins have denounced it.
An explanation of the law is in order, if only so TV viewers can understand the bizarre ads.
Under current law, someone working in the private sector who wants employees to join a union typically finds an existing union under which the business might fit. That union would then send a representative to meet with workers.
If the union representative gauges support for joining a union is strong, he then circulates “authorization cards” among the staff. The local worker typically gathers the cards, which are signed. If 30 percent of workers indicate they want a union, the employer is obligated to hold a secret ballot vote among employees. But typically, the process would not go forward unless at least 50 percent signed cards favoring a union, because union organizers know that many people will sign a card but not actually vote for a union.
If enough workers sign the card favoring a union, the union representative meets with the employer. The employer can simply agree to form a union, demand to see the cards, or call for a secret ballot election, which is supervised by the National Labor Relations Board. Labor relations lawyers generally advise employers not to look at the cards to avoid lawsuits that might come if a pro-union worker is fired and then claims retaliation was the motive.
After the cards are filed, the employer can hold meetings at which he can try to persuade workers against forming a union. The employer is not allowed to intimidate or coerce workers to vote against the union by promising better pay or benefits. About half the efforts at forming unions in the private sector in Maine fail.
Under the Employee Free Choice Act, which is now languishing in the Senate, if more than 50 percent of workers sign cards authorizing a union, the employer must begin negotiating with the new bargaining unit, and no secret ballot is required.
Opponents, such as Sen. Collins, argue it unfairly restrains the employer from making the case against a union and denies workers a pressure-free secret ballot vote. Proponents, such as Rep. Allen, argue the plight of middle class workers has eroded significantly is recent years, and the new law would help level the playing field to help employees get health insurance, pensions and job security.
Pro-union voters will likely agree with Rep. Allen, and anti-union voters will probably side with Sen. Collins, so the confusing ads aren’t likely to make much difference. And for what it’s worth: “Sopranos” actor Vincent Curatola, who appears in one of the ads, is a member of the Screen Actors Guild, a union.
On 8/23/08 at 6:39 PM,
Johninphilippines wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
I do not know who wrote this editorial, however the facts in this matter are correct. I have worked in union and non-union shops back in the USA throughout my 50+ years of employment. In my experience, there has been both well-operated, cooperative unions and their stewardships, and poorly-operated, uncooperative unions and their stewardships. As a managerial, exempt employee of these companies I worked for, I may have seen it all. No need to mention how smoothly some unions can effectively operate within any given corporation. This is, as a general rule, rare. But, there are unions that cannot seem to get their act together with certain companies and vice versa. In several strikes I have been involved with, and in several union campaigns, the only ones to be affected are the workers and the productivity of the company. The employees always lose out on their wages, as they are not "punched-in" on the time clock. Union affiliation, in most cases, only produces (pays) union members a stipend for being off work to join a strike. Certainly not enough money to feed a family and pay the bills. Unions, established by John L. Lewis, were to safeguard against poor working conditions, low wages, sweat shop environments, unsafe working conditions, lack of vacations, no payouts for on-the-job injuries, flagrant terminations (firings), and the list can go on. Over time, the US Government has added new laws and statutes to completely cover worker issues as well as corporations, who also have their in-house programs. However, unions, through higher wage and benefit demands can escalate the pricing of a commodity they may build or perform as a service. Look at that price sticker on automobiles, as an example. With some autoworker's making $40.00 + an hour, with benefits that surpass most any employee in private or public service, kick-in overtime at $60.00 an hour at time-and-a-half; that equates to (with the hourly wage =) $100.00 + dollars an hour overtime. They manage to get a lot of overtime, too. That was just one example. But consider this, also...when a strike is on, workers are outside in all types of weather marching around in front of the company they are striking, and getting paid a stipend by the union on a daily basis. At the same time, notice the employee parking lot. Take note of the cars. Then, here come the stewards and other union officials driving in with their luxury cars and sport-utility vehicles. Know now where the union dues go? Take a look at the union hall. I'am not advocating to join a union or not...that is the choice of the person himself or herself to do so. What I'am saying is for the workers to be careful to consider if that union is going to be a real benefit to them or not...and if the union stewardship and others upholding union affiliation, will do a great job on selling the union to you. Can the union outdo a company's ability to care for it's workers? In my experience, the unions generally cannot do it.
On 8/24/08 at 11:13 PM,
vichet wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
I too have been a teamster shop steward as well a small business owner. I saw close up how unions crap on their membership and the workers never even know that it happened. .. As a small business operator I can only imagine owning a 4 person workplace and can envision this happening. Two employees go out to a bar after a hard day and run into a union organizer who pulls out a couple of cards for them to sign. Suddenly the business must negotiate with a union. It would be likely that the business would be closed in a matter of weeks. Remember there is no size limit to the company that can be organized. The other two employees would have nothing to say about it and be jobless and the two who signed would have nothing to shw for it but hangovers.
On 8/26/08 at 12:43 PM,
cathy12 wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
I've learned a lot about unions in a short period of time, and I too have to second and third everything the two other commenters wrote. If you are a diplomatic and reasonable person, in most instances in this century, there is always a means to work out an issue between you and your employer using the current laws and regulations. In most instances, when I've seen or talked to an employee who felt as though they were being treated unfairly they were not even aware that their emplyer had a policy regarding how to resolve a greivance.
On 8/28/08 at 12:01 AM,
snonut800 wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
I am a second generation Teamster. My dad didn't get involved but I resolved to keep informed as much as possible. First of all, the "Employee Free Choice Act" ends up protecting those people who are interested in joining a union. Currently, once enough authorization cards are signed and a petition for election is filed there is a substantial time frame before an election actually takes place. During this time frame, most anti-union companies subject their employees to "special meetings" and extensive "team building seminars". Some big companies go so far as to fly in their crisis response teams that are specially trained in anti-union rhetoric. And don't let their smiling faces fool you, anyone suspected of supporting a union at some of these companies do face retribution even though it's not legal. Signing a card under the new legislation would eliminate all these games and let people act freely without being scared of their employer. I drive a concrete truck and I don't see my wages and very good benefits driving the cost up any higher than what our non-union competitors charge (maybe they're just pocketing that extra instead of taking care of their employees). I work long hard hours and at least with a contract I know I'm going to get a decent return for my effort. As far as strikes go, they are the absolute LAST option, there are no winners in a strike. And on the subject of vehicles, if you don't want your business agent showing up to represent you in a decent automobile go to the monthly meetings and vote it down. People just don't get it, you can vote and express your opinions, most people are just too lazy to get involved and expect someone else to do it, then they complain that the union is not doing anything for them. We started out as a small company that kept getting bought out by bigger outfits, we've just become a truck number to them and they really don't care. The more you deal with large corporations you realize that they will just use you and abuse you to improve their bottom line. Without a contract they can do whatever they want to you - cut benefits - lower wages - fire you at will - you can bet they aren't going to do you any favors, remember stockholders are the only people they care about. One last thing, a properly operating union is going to get it's members a fair share, nobody gets paid if the company closes.
On 8/31/08 at 7:27 PM,
NarsBars wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
The E.F.C.A. would deny a company the right to make a case against a Union. Hot air! Every workday the employer has the chance to make their case by respecting their employees, by paying them well, by trying to provide the best benefit package available.
If the employees still want a Union then the employer has not made their case.
Post a comment about this story
You must be logged in to post a comment.
click here to log in.
