Home

Card Check Syndicate content

Senate Hearings Today on Obama's Radical, Pro-Coercion Labor Board Nominee

Tue, 02/02/2010 - 11:56 — Nick Cote

Yesterday in Roll Call, Bret Jacobson noted the importance of today's Senate hearings on President Obama's nomination of Service Employee International Union General Counsel, Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board.

Thus, we have today’s hearing for Becker, a longtime strategist and lawyer for organized labor. If they can’t get “card check” through a broad, participatory legislative process, they’ll push to grab a similar victory through the federal board’s ability to regulate without approval of the people’s Representatives.

As such, this hearing — demanded by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who is troubled by Becker’s blatantly anti-employer views — signals that we have officially hit plan B on the administration’s strategy for pandering to the organized labor lobby. This new course will focus on the quiet job-killer of regulation and card check by fiat.

But the real problem isn't that Becker is anti-employer -- it's that his career as a diehard union boss apologist reveals an extreme hostility to the very employees the union bosses claim to represent.  Last October, National Right Work president Mark Mix took to the pages of the Washington Times to make this very point:

In fact, as a former AFL-CIO and Service Employees International Union (SEIU) lawyer, Mr. Becker is solely responsible for forcing tens of thousands of workers under union boss control.

In one case, reports from a Los Angeles SEIU local union revealed that almost 63,000 people rejected membership in the union in 2007, but thanks to Mr. Becker, were still forced to pay dues.

And Mr. Becker's own words explain why. He was even so bold as to say unions were "formed to escape the evils of individualism and individual competition ... their actions necessarily involve coercion."

With that kind of anything-goes attitude, it's no surprise Mr. Becker supports "home visits," in which union militants repeatedly harass workers at home until they sign union-authorization cards, and even advocates letting Mr. Obama's handpicked arbiters impose contracts on workers, without even allowing the workers to vote on their own contract.

Contrast Craig Becker's radical, pro-coercion views with the words of Samuel Gompers, founder of the American Federation of Labor: "No lasting gain has ever come from compulsion."

For more on Becker, see this post from the National Right to Work Committee's blog and visit their action center here.

 

Conflict of Interest? The News Media and Forced Unionism

Fri, 01/22/2010 - 16:05 — Nick Cote

At The Daily Caller, the anonymous Anchorman -- "a well-known news anchor from a top-10, big-city news station" -- brings up an interesting point about his colleagues' political coverage. The American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA) union "represents" most television network news correspondents and anchors.  That "representation" includes political advocacy, including as the anchorman points out, lobbying efforts on the health care / forced unionization legislation currently pending in Congress.

If that bothers you, you should also know that your “objective” network correspondent, roaming the halls of Congress right now trying to ferret out the “truth,” probably pays hundreds, or even thousands of dollars in union dues to AFTRA every year. He or she, in all likelihood, depends on AFTRA for one of those “Cadillac” health insurance plans that is the subject of so much debate. He or she also will receive a nice little AFTRA pension come retirement time, and perhaps most importantly, will depend on AFTRA to help defend, protect or advise them in any serious conflicts, demotions, firings, or legal issues with management at their TV station or network.

Might this conflict of interest also impact the media's coverage of the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill?  We'd be surprised if it didn't affect some reporters' objectivity  In fact, here's the kind of analysis of that bill you won't see on the nightly news.

NLRB Busted for Keeping Information Secret Documenting Employee Objections to Card Check Organizing

Wed, 01/20/2010 - 15:38 — Will Collins

In 2007, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys persuaded the National Labor Relations Board to establish new rights for workers through the landmark Dana/Metaldyne decision.  The ruling empowered workers to call a vote to kick out an unwanted union during a 45-day window period following a successful "card check" organizing drive.

The ruling was a rebuke of union organizers and their coercive tactics, as the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) acknowledged the abuses, and determined that employees needed a way to challenge the imposition of a union workplace monopoly via card check by obtaining a secret ballot decertification election.

Prior to the Obama Administration, the NLRB maintained an online database of all card check recognitions and any subsequent union decertification elections. The NLRB, however, stopped updating this information last spring. Foundation attorneys recently demanded the NLRB to update the database regularly, and NLRB Chairman Wilma Liebman responded last week.  Although she blamed the General Counsel's office for the neglect, she stated the agency would post new information monthly going forward.

While this information doesn't prevent coercive card check organizing on the job - an increasingly common union tactic even without passage of the pending EFCA legislation in Congress - it does help the public see how widely used this abusive union organizing actually is... and which companies have blocked their employees' access to secret balloting.

Perhaps even more importantly, this data reveals the nasty little fact that card check signing does not represent employees' true wishes.  For in many cases, the very union bosses who came in through card check were sent packing -- only days later -- after employees obtained a secret ballot vote. 

AFL-CIO Czar Trumka: Card Check Forced Unionism Will Pass

Tue, 01/19/2010 - 15:35 — Nick Cote

Last week, AFL-CIO union czar Richard Trumka (download the Foundation's Fact Sheet on his history of condoning union violence and corruption) made headlines by predicting that the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill will pass in early 2010.  The heated debate over the health care overhaul legislation has kept the public eye off this other union boss power grab for a few months, but Trumka's prediction makes it clear Big Labor's high command haven't forgotten about their highest priority.

The Card Check Forced Unionism Bill would effectively eliminate workers' right to a secret ballot in workplace unionization drives and replace it with overt union intimidation:

Under the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill, the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) that refer to the secret ballot election would be rendered a dead letter, even though they are not technically stricken from federal law.

Big Labor spin artists can claim all they want that the workers can still "choose" to have a secret ballot election, but there simply is no way by which workers can force union bosses to file for a secret ballot election -- and it is union bosses, not workers, who are in possession of the cards.  Reporters who repeat this union boss talking point owe their readers a correction.

Read the full analysis here.  Union bosses prefer card check instant organizing because it puts all of the power in their hands -- free from the meddling interference of government election supervisors and the workers themselves.  

Fortunately, we already know what card check campaigns look like.  Unfortunately, we only know this because hardworking Americans have been subjected to harassment, intimidation, and coercion by union bosses to get them to sign cards.  In the video below, Dana Corporation employees in Albion, Indiana, shared their stories with the National Right to Work Committee.

The National Right to Work Committee warns to beware of any bogus compromises under the guise of protecting the secret ballot.  One of the most dangerous aspect of the "compromise" talks is the lack of focus on the other toxic provision of the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill: mandatory binding arbitration.

Under the bill, workers won't just lose the right to a secret ballot when deciding whether or not to form a union.  Even those who choose to join a union's ranks may see their voting rights severely limited, as mandatory binding arbitration would allow government bureaucrats to impose contracts on workers.  That means union members may not even be able to vote to ratify their contracts: Whatever the government says... goes.

Even Far Left icon George McGovern knows this is a terrible idea.   And as Reason Foundation analyst Shikha Dalmia detailed in the Wall Street Journal, states' experiments with mandatory binding arbitration and public sector unions have led to atrocious results -- including out of control budgets and fiscal mismanagement.

Podcast: Right to Work Vice President Doug Stafford Interviewed on the Lars Larson Show

Tue, 09/08/2009 - 16:38 — Will Collins

Right to Work Committee VP Doug Stafford sat down with nationally-syndicated radio host Lars Larson to talk card check, possible Big Labor "compromises" and the newly-revived Police and Firefighters Monopoly Bargaining Bill. Click here to listen or use the embeddable player below:

You can also listen to the Foundation's podcast via iTunes or manually subscribe to the feed.  

Fact Sheet: Union Monopoly Privileges Linked to Lower Earnings and Disposable Incomes for Workers

Fri, 08/28/2009 - 14:12 — Anthony Riedel

Contrary to the usual propaganda union bosses would like you to believe, the National Institute for Labor Relations Research (NILRR) -- an anti-compulsory unionism think tank that exposes the harm forced unionism inflicts on workers -- released a report today entitled "Union Monopoly Linked to Lower Purchasing Power" that details how workers in least-unionized states enjoy the benefits of higher cost-of-living-adjusted earnings and disposable incomes.

You see, not only does government-granted union monopoly bargaining privileges infringe on employees' individual liberty, it also harms employees' economic interests.

According to NILRR:

As of 2008, according to economists Barry Hirsch and David Macpherson, 8.4% of private-sector employees nationwide were under “exclusive” union representation. But in 15 states -- Alaska, California, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania,. Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin --10.0% or more of private-sector workers were unionized.

...

In 2008, cost of living-adjusted average weekly earnings in the states with 10.0% or more of private-sector employees subject to union monopoly bargaining were $770.

That’s $48 less than the average in the states with private-sector unionization of 5.0% or less. (These low-union density states are: Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Virginia.) That comes to a roughly $2500-a-year disadvantage for full-time workers in states with high monopoly-bargaining density.

Aggregate cost of living-adjusted weekly earnings for states with private-sector union density of 5.1% to 9.9% were $783, or, for full-time workers, nearly $700 a year more than in the highest-union-density states, but more than $1800 a year less than in the lowest-union-density states.

NILRR also reports that "disposable income data tell the same story."

The economic benefits of voluntary union membership should come to no surprise to regular Freedom@Work readers, as we reported last month in "Compulsory Unionism Bankrupting States: Workers Flee to Right to Work States for Jobs":

NILRR recently found an especially strong correlation between a state’s Right to Work status and its job growth, while employees in Right to Work states are benefiting from faster job growth and higher real purchasing power than their compulsory unionism counterparts.

To view NILRR's fact sheet "Union Monopoly Linked to Lower Purchasing Power", click here.

EXPOSED: Big Labor Announces “Secret Plan to Destroy the Right Forever”

Fri, 08/14/2009 - 12:21 — Nick Cote

In a surprising display of honesty about their true agenda, union bosses and Far Left activists participated on a panel at the Netroots Nation conference called "The Secret Plan to Destroy the American Right."

What's their "secret plan" to expand the power and size of government and raise taxes on hard-working Americans? It's passage of the woefully misnamed Employee Free Choice Act, more accurately called the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill.

Union bosses apparently see the billions of forced dues dollars that the bill would funnel into pushing Organized Labor's radical political agenda as THE major selling point for the bill.

Unfortunately for the panelists and the Big Labor hierarchy, but fortunately for the American people, there's nothing secret about the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill and how it would obliterate the rights of American workers.  Right here on Freedom@Work, we've kept concerned citizens informed about this union boss power grab:

Check out our full archive on card check.

Right to Work States Aren't Safe If Card Check Forced Unionism Passes

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 09:26 — Will Collins

Union bosses are trying to downplay the impact of their 'Card Check Forced Unionism' legislation in Right to Work states.  While Right to Work laws are critical in protecting employees from forced union dues and in creating jobs and a higher standard of living, the fact is they do not deter coercive union organizing and other types of union abuse. The National Right to Work Foundation has released a short backgrounder on this topic, which is now available for download here.

Although state Right to Work laws do ensure that no worker can be forced to pay union dues as a condition of employment, card check organizing campaigns make it dramatically easier for Big Labor to install union cronies in workplaces across the country. The end result is that even in Right to Work states, employees can be forced to accept union "representation" -- where union bosses may dictate the terms and conditions of their employment.

Read the whole thing for a clearer picture of how card check legislation will impact workers' livelihoods across the country, even if they live in Right to Work states.

WSJ: Mandatory Binding Arbitration Means More Power for Union Bosses, While Workers Lose Rights

Tue, 07/14/2009 - 17:15 — Nick Cote

Here at Freedom@Work, we've covered the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (more accurately called the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill). The job-killing bill would effectively eliminate the secret ballot in union certification elections and open up workers to intimidation and dirty tricks by union organizers in coercive card check organizing drives.  Moreover, the bill's mandatory binding arbitration provision would allow federal bureaucrats to impose terms and conditions of employment on workers and employers -- which even Far Left icon George McGovern opposes.

Shikha Dalmia, senior analyst at the Reason Foundation, wrote in the Wall Street Journal this weekend -- echoing what National Right to Work has been documenting for years -- that mandatory binding arbitration has been occurring in government employment in numerous forced unionism states with atrocious results.

In 1969, the Wolverine State embraced a form of compulsory arbitration nearly identical to the one proposed in EFCA to resolve disputes with its police and firefighters. Years later, Detroit mayor Coleman Young -- who had authored the original law as state senator -- rued what he had done. "We now know that compulsory arbitration has been a failure," he lamented to the National Journal in 1981. "Slowly, inexorably, compulsory interest arbitration has destroyed sensible fiscal management and has caused more damage to the public service than the strikes it was designed to prevent."

...

A 2006 task force convened by Gov. Jennifer Granholm, who supports compulsory arbitration, found that local government costs in arbitration states are 3%-5% higher compared to nonarbitration states. "While small in percentage terms, the impact in dollar terms is huge," the task force concluded. Given that local governments in Michigan alone spend over $23 billion annually, this works out to over a billion in extra spending for them.

Michigan's experience is hardly unique. Former Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis also tried to limit public-sector compulsory arbitration during his first term. In 1977, Mr. Dukakis argued that compulsory arbitration "has removed legitimate management prerogatives in the area of staff assignments, (and) transfers from the control of municipal officials at a time when they are under severe pressure to improve their management and make savings." Mr. Dukakis failed to stop compulsory arbitration, but two years later Massachusetts voters approved a ballot initiative that effectively scrapped it.

...

Businesses are not the only losers in compulsory arbitration. Currently, any contract negotiated by union officials has to be ratified through a vote of rank-and-file members. Under compulsory arbitration, workers do not get this vote. In other words, EFCA will take away the right of workers to vote to form a union, and then binding arbitration will take away their right to vote on a contract.

The only clear winners under this law would be the union bosses, who will obtain new powers without any new accountability. If Michigan's experience suggests anything, it's that rank-and-file workers, businesses, and the American economy will suffer. Sen. Lincoln and her colleagues should bear this in mind before they make their final decisions.

[Emphasis added]

Read the whole thing here.

 

Click here to watch an urgent video message from Senator Jim DeMint, Steve Forbes, and National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. 

New Right to Work Podcast: Right to Work, Card Check, and the Police and Firefighters Monopoly Bargaining Bill

Tue, 07/07/2009 - 16:44 — Will Collins

Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason sits down with Reality Check Radio to discuss the history of the Right to Work movement, Card Check, and the Police and Firefighters Monopoly Bargaining Bill. Click here to listen or use the embedded player below:


You can also listen to the Foundation's podcast via iTunes or manually subscribe to the feed.

Click here to watch an urgent video message from Senator Jim DeMint, Steve Forbes, and National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix.

123456789…next ›last »

Terms of Web Site Use      Related Links: National Right to Work Committee | National Institute for Labor Relations Research

Copyright © 2010 National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation
 National Right to Work Legal Defense and Education Foundation, Inc.
8001 Braddock Road / Springfield, Virginia 22160
(703) 321-8510 | (800) 336-3600 / (703) 321-9613 fax - general (703) 321-9319 fax - legal department