Workers need free choice act

Oct 18, 2008
470
41
16
Bowling Green Ohio
from the Toledo Blade letters to the editor.

Judging by his Feb. 14 column, which mischaracterized the Employee Free Choice Act, Roger R. Geiger could benefit from the perspective of a nonmanagement worker who has actually been through a union-organizing campaign.

When coworkers at my long-term care facility began meeting to unionize about six years ago, our boss reacted by putting every possible obstacle in our way.

Despite Mr. Geiger's claim, most union elections bear no resemblance to political elections in a free society. How often in political elections, after all, does one candidate directly control your pay, work schedule, and employment status?

Workers' free-speech rights are regularly squelched during mandatory, one-sided presentations designed to mislead and frighten. It is patronizing for Mr. Geiger to describe these manipulative, captive-audience sessions as a "courtesy." Employers also practice various forms of economic coercion taken straight out of their union-busting consultants' playbook, including favoritism and empty threats of workplace closure. If those tactics fail, current labor law encourages anti-union employers to use drawn-out appeals so they can delay recognizing the will of their workers indefinitely.

Contrary to Mr. Geiger's claim, the Employee Free Choice Act does not abolish elections or "secret ballots." Under the proposed legislation, workers get to choose which way we want to unionize: either by elections or majority sign-up. Current law unfairly lets employers make that choice, instead of the workers who are directly involved.

Studies show the experiences that I've had are typical of what workers undergo during organizing attempts. We need to return fairness to the workplace and true choice to America's workers, which is why Congress should pass the Employee Free Choice Act.

Karen Kirkwood

toledoblade.com --
 
from the Toledo Blade letters to the editor.

Judging by his Feb. 14 column, which mischaracterized the Employee Free Choice Act, Roger R. Geiger could benefit from the perspective of a nonmanagement worker who has actually been through a union-organizing campaign.

When coworkers at my long-term care facility began meeting to unionize about six years ago, our boss reacted by putting every possible obstacle in our way.

Despite Mr. Geiger's claim, most union elections bear no resemblance to political elections in a free society. How often in political elections, after all, does one candidate directly control your pay, work schedule, and employment status?

Workers' free-speech rights are regularly squelched during mandatory, one-sided presentations designed to mislead and frighten. It is patronizing for Mr. Geiger to describe these manipulative, captive-audience sessions as a "courtesy." Employers also practice various forms of economic coercion taken straight out of their union-busting consultants' playbook, including favoritism and empty threats of workplace closure. If those tactics fail, current labor law encourages anti-union employers to use drawn-out appeals so they can delay recognizing the will of their workers indefinitely.

Contrary to Mr. Geiger's claim, the Employee Free Choice Act does not abolish elections or "secret ballots." Under the proposed legislation, workers get to choose which way we want to unionize: either by elections or majority sign-up. Current law unfairly lets employers make that choice, instead of the workers who are directly involved.

Studies show the experiences that I've had are typical of what workers undergo during organizing attempts. We need to return fairness to the workplace and true choice to America's workers, which is why Congress should pass the Employee Free Choice Act.

Karen Kirkwood

toledoblade.com --


So, why would a secret vote be a problem?
 
Republicans should add an amendment that if secret ballots aren't important, federal and state election voting should be open to the public as well.

If we abolish the right to secret ballots for union elections...we should abolish secret ballots for all elections.
 
Last edited:
Some freedom of choice.

Imagine 5 or 6 leather jacketed thugs carrying axe handles corner you in the men's room and tell you that you want to join the union.... the or else is understood of course.
 
Some freedom of choice.

Imagine 5 or 6 leather jacketed thugs carrying axe handles corner you in the men's room and tell you that you want to join the union.... the or else is understood of course.

That doesn't happen, those are just old folk tales.....:rolleyes:
 
there we go again with the old outdated jimmy hoffa mobster/gangster union fairytale bias...some people will never change opinions I guess!:tongue:

Ahh.. there is NO intimidation out there with unions or anything else that YOU SUPPORT.. but you'll claim it all over the place the minute someone asks to check an ID to ensure you are who you claim to be when casting a vote in a government election

The secret ballot ensures that people need not be afraid in how they vote with ANY sort of retribution...

Open calls can be more influenced by mob rule, emotional sentiment, posturing and pressuring, etc... like when normal every day people can be swept up in a riot or can be pressured by peers to do things they normally would not do or want to do.. and that is EXACTLY what the unions want.. they want that influence and power again
 
another prime example that the left cannot compete on a fair playing field,, they have to resort to force and thuggery!
 
No, workers need to be able to express a vote without fear of retaliation and intimidation.

There is no reason for this to be open ballot outside of giving Unions the names of those that oppose it, so they can intimidate them into a new postion.
 
A recent Survey suggest that as much as 80% of the population have no desire to join any union anywhere at anytime excdcept for their local credit union. Since the Unions can't win fair and square and they Dems need those union dues to have any shot at winning and election guess what there going to try to shove unions down our thraot right along with socialized medicine, and assorted soak the rich schmes that'll wind up leaving the rest of us jobless.
 
Republicans should add an amendment that if secret ballots aren't important, federal and state election voting should be open to the public as well.

If we abolish the right to secret ballots for union elections...we should abolish secret ballots for all elections.

Why? I can't remember the last time I voted in a campaign where one of the candidates had the power to hire or fire me.
 

Forum List

Back
Top