| September 7, 2008 | Posted by rachel c under 2008, Elections, Jobs, Labor, Politics, Poverty, Uncategorized, Voting Rights |
A caller on the Thom Hartmann show last week said that card check neutrality (when an employer agrees to remain neutral when their employees form a union — what the Employee Free Choice Act would guarentee for all workers) is really analogous to voter registration. I like that.
Opponents of employee free choice often frame card check agreements as if an employer is agreeing to mandate that its workers join a union. That’s just not the case– only workers can organize a union. The “neutrality” is that the employer just agrees to not interfere as they practice that choice, that vote. The employer agrees to honor democratic freedom in the workplace.
Indeed, unions are the only institution for workplace democracy
More:
2) Read this interesting Op-Ed from today’s paper, an employer who supports the Employee Free Choice Act:
http://www.pittsburghpost-gazette.com/pg/08246/908668-432.stm
|
About : |
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
The Pittsburgh-based natural gas and coal extractor contributed $150,000 to a Romney-affiliated Super PAC in July. Consol executives also gave $22,000 to the Republican front-runner’s campaign during the most recent Federal Elections Commission filing period, which covered October, November and December 2011.

@PoliticsPA looks at the PAGOP Endorsement Policies - PAGOP to County Chairs: Non-Endorsed Candidates Need Not Apply
Ironically, those elements in the GOP want to run things more like Pa. Democrats.Dem state committee endorsements are not binding despite requiring a higher, two-thirds threshold (the PAGOP only requires 50 percent plus 1). Democratic county committees can – and often do – endorse primary opponents of candidates that have been endorsed by the state committee.
And efforts by reformers who want the party to emulate the GOP – by tightening up the bylaws or to committing noteworthy financial resources to back up endorsements – are the subject of intense scrutiny by progressives and activists.
So who’s right? GOP party leaders point to the most important statistic of all: win rate. Since 2001, the GOP has won 54 percent of contested statewide elections.

Related articles

@PoliticsPA looks at the PAGOP Endorsement Policies - PAGOP to County Chairs: Non-Endorsed Candidates Need Not Apply
Ironically, those elements in the GOP want to run things more like Pa. Democrats.Dem state committee endorsements are not binding despite requiring a higher, two-thirds threshold (the PAGOP only requires 50 percent plus 1). Democratic county committees can – and often do – endorse primary opponents of candidates that have been endorsed by the state committee.
And efforts by reformers who want the party to emulate the GOP – by tightening up the bylaws or to committing noteworthy financial resources to back up endorsements – are the subject of intense scrutiny by progressives and activists.
So who’s right? GOP party leaders point to the most important statistic of all: win rate. Since 2001, the GOP has won 54 percent of contested statewide elections.

Related articles

Who are you supporting for Allegheny County Controller
Total Votes: 33
Your brief post does not even mention the most contentious (and IMO outrageous) aspect of the EFCA. And that is the FACT that this law will make it possible for UNION BOSSES to choose whether or not a secret ballot election is held. And why would th UNION BOSSES want a secret ballot election if they can use coercion and intimidation to get the union approved with a card check (personally handed ballots) election? I can’t believe that anyone would give anybody this kind of power. Are the unions trying to return to the good old days of racketeering and cement shoes?
hmm.. actually, “Merit Man,” that was the point of my post. looks like you’re on the other side of the debate and are just trying to argue?
in “FACT,” why would there need to be a closed ballot election when a majority of workers in a given work place sign union membership cards?
furthermore, i’m not sure about “union bosses,” but i’ve sure seen real bosses intimidate the heck out of workers who try to exercise their choice in so-called “closed ballot” elections.
supporting EFCA is about supporting people’s right to exercise actual democracy in the workplace. period.