How is there more intimidation with a secret ballot than the card check system? And how do free trade agreements come into the discussion?

I am a labor attorney who is a former National Labor Relations Board attorney and former Director of Labor Relations for a major company and currently teach Labor Relations in an MBA program.
Under the current law, a union can petition the Naitonal Labor Relations Board to conduct a secret ballot election if it has a showing of interest, usually signed cards, from 30% of the employees. The NLRB conducts the election under pristine secret ballot methods. the proposed law would allow for a second process for the NLRB to certify a union, through showing that the union has over half of the employees signing to indicate their membership in the union. The "card check" is a key part of the proposed legislation. That said, there is now a lot of speculation that the proposed law will probably be amended to not have this "card check" provision but to rather require the NLRB to conduct the secret ballot elections in a much quicker process, maybe within days of a petition being filed.
Please post any other questions on this matter and I would be happy to offer responses. I will not take sides on this issue.

Thanks for the great information OHIOGOLF. I have nowhere near your experience, but in two case I was involved in, had there not been a secret election and only the petition there sure would have been much more intimidation (and there was a lot) to get to the 50% mark. So we wait and see on the card check but the President Elect seems to be straight forward in his support.

Thanks again for the informative post !

Right to organize
 

I am very glad to see interest in this type of discussion. I don't think Unions in general, do a good job at PR. Thank you to the Ohio poster for a clear definition of the pending legislation. I believe that anything that allows workers to safely, without threat of job loss, to vote on weather or not to form a Union is a good thing. If not this legislation, then better legislation would be good. When Union membership is up, the middle class is strong.

I have taken part in many organizing efforts, some successful, some not, but I have never witnessed any behaviors from the UAW that I would not be proud to be a part of. I have however, seen intimidation and dirty tricks from management groups that would make your hair stand on end.

I have cried with a strong minded single mom who just was fired because she was labeled a Union sympathizer, for exercising her right to support the Union. I knew full well that with the labor board stacked with anti-union Bush appointees it could be a long time, if ever that she could get her job back.

Sadly, my childhood neighbor back in NY owned a Beer distributorship. He spent millions on a "West Coast Consultant firm"(Ohio will know the consultants I am talking about), that promised to squelch any effort to organize his business. They followed the children of sympathetic workers home from school, spread awful lies about workers and wound up in a confrontation that ended with a mysterious attack on two outspoken workers landing them in the hospital. That money could have been better spent negotiating a fair wage and benefit agreement for the workers.

Our Union has negotiated a concession contract with for the few workers left at our plant (From 11,000 in 1977 to 2000 today) to cut in half their wages, provide only single health coverage, and no pension other than an self funded 401k, to help them out a bunch of bad business decisions followed by the slumping economy.

I hope those jobs are as important as the banking jobs are to the government. They are looking for loans, not gifts if I understand what the big 3 are asking for, and I hope that any help will be tied to job creation here in the US.

What could be a better investment than one in the industry that helped this country win WWII? If all of our factories are over seas, next time where will Rosie the Riveter work?

In earlier posts there were discussions on how unions and the healthcare and pension costs were driving US companies into bankruptcy.

That is how free trade agreements came into the discussion.

This pattern is all too frequently repeated whether it be Appliance Park, the steel mills, the airlines or the 'big' three. Driving companies out of business or out of the country is not a win for anyone. We have two automobile industries in this country; one headquartered in Detroit and another spread throughout the south. The first is highly unionized and has been shutting factories, laying off workers and losing money and marketshare. The second is building new factories, hiring more workers at good wages, making money and gaining marketshare. It is, coincidentally, not highly unionized.

Te question for this country is which model do we want to follow - the one that destroys jobs and companies or the one that creates jobs and allows companies to grow? I oppose card check not only because it pushes the country to the first model, but starts taking this country down the road where democratic elections are no longer required.

I pick a fair days pay, for a fiar days work!
 

You failed to mention that the other industry model that you refer to is based in Tokyo, subsided by the Japan Government, taking the profits off shore, while piling tariffs on our imported goods. Some of those operations are now unionized with more requests every day as economic conditions worsen.

The workers at our plant now make around $17.00 an hour, (about $35,000 a year). That is about what wages were in 1980, and the top executives still make obscene salaries, most being rewarded grandly for years of bad business decisions.

We all picked our career paths for a reason but when I started on an assembly line of over 100 people over 25 of us had bachelors degrees or better. Most of us were teachers that couldn't find a job, but that Union job provided my family and I a nice lifestyle and a comfortable retirement after 30 years. I am not embarrassed to look back on a job that paid a fair wage for a hard days work. We are by no means rich, and I worry those left behind will not be able to buy a house, raise a family and retire with dignity. Is that really too much to ask, given none of us retired without repetitive motion injuries, chemical exposure conditions, hearing loss etc.

If I didn't answer your question directly I am sorry. The answer is Unions provide the balance necessary to insure individual workers have a voice in this world of Corporate greed. I pick the fair model in a fair and equal market playing field.

Thanks for the opportunity to have and intelligent idea exchange!

Darn old people!
 

I also didn't mention that those new companies don't have so many residual costs as the work force is new, with none of us retirees being provided for (as promised). We are stubbornly living longer, and costing these 100 year old businesses more than they planned. Sorry about that.

They will, someday, be in the same boat.

Nicely said lazeelink! Sorry I'm out of order and reading posts backward.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but it is my understanding that laid off workers at Ford can go to the union hall and wait to be called back. As long as they show up they get a (full?) days pay. Many of these folks will never be called back and are just running out the clock at Ford's expense.

It seems to me that the problem with the Unions is that they fail to change with the times. I'm not a union guy so perhaps I'm wrong but that is the perception at least.

I do take issue with the executive salaries too but that's another discussion.

Laid Off Worker Benefits
 

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but it is my understanding that laid off workers at Ford can go to the union hall and wait to be called back. As long as they show up they get a (full?) days pay. Many of these folks will never be called back and are just running out the clock at Ford's expense.

I’m not sure how the UAW contract reads in times such as these. I do know speaking from a union construction labor view that a laid off worker returns to the hall and registers on the out of work list. Calls come in to the hall from the signatory contractors requesting services and you are dispatched to a job on a first in, first out basis. There isn’t any pay associated with these lapses in work unless you apply and receive unemployment insurance. Of course each local construction union has several signatory contractors as opposed to one such as Ford, GM, etc. While one contractor may be slow another may have quite a bit of work so your chances of employment are increased.

I would imagine the UAW’s views would be different representing workers in a single plant. Perhaps cglenhar can address your question?

I can't speak specifically to Ford's agreement as my contract was tied to GM. Generally in the collective bargaining process the Union strives to make it cost more to outsorce jobs (like to Mexico) thereby encouraging managment to keep work here. So it could be true that certain workers were owed pay (sort of like severance) if their jobs were lost due to work done offshore.

I am only guessing because each situation is different. Sometimes laid off workers draw from a sub fund that is jointly funded by workers and managment to ensure income during the cyclical down turns in the business.

If anyone thinks it is business as usual in today's economy, they are wrong. The Union has paired with managment to improve things like cost and quality and made great progress. The auto industry is fighting for its life, and nothing is more important to the Union than salvaging the jobs that still exist. If that is not changing with the times, there is nothing else that the Union can do. They only exist to promote and protect the workers, and that will always be the case. The stratigic direction of the business solely belongs to managment.

That said the business choices managment made to build the gas gusslers instead of developing fuel efficent cars has proven to be a disaster. Who would have predicted that gas would go through the roof and america's love affair with the monster truck would end? It is very difficult to change direction on a dime for these large Corporations.

We all remain hopefull that any government help will be tied to R&D in new products and US job retention, and creation.

Why Save American Jobs?
 

I could let this one pass by, considering the recent news and events regarding the Big 3, and what's at stake for current, and future jobs for millions of people, and the risk of losing technological advances, knowledge, and experience of our manufacturing capabilities.

> LET EVERYONE KNOW
> For the record...
> Ford, Chrysler and GM's contributions after 9/11
>
> An interesting commentary...You might find this of
> interest:
>
> 'CNN Headline News did a short news listing regarding Ford
> and GM's
> contri butions to the relief and recovery efforts in New
> York and Washington .
>
> The findings are as follows.....
>
> 1. Ford- $10 million to American Red Cross matching
> employee contributions of the same number plus 10
> Excursions to NY Fire Dept. The company also offered ER
> response team services and office space to displaced
> government employees.
>
> 2. GM- $10 million to American Red Cross matching employee
> contributions of the sam e number and a fleet of vans,
> suv's, and trucks.
>
> 3. Daimler Chrysler- $10 million to support of the children
> and victims of the Sept. 11 attack.
>
> 4. Harley Davidson motorcycles- $1 million and 30 new
> motorcycles to the
> New YorkPolice Dept.
>
> 5. Volkswagen-Employees and management created a Sept 11
> Foundation,
> funded initial with $2 million, for the assistance of the
> children and victims of the WTC.
>
> 6. Hyundai- $300,000 to the American Red Cross.
>
> 7. Audi-Nothing.
>
> 8. BMW-Nothing.
>
> 9. Daewoo- Nothing.
>
> 10. Fiat-Nothing.
>
> 11. Honda- Nothing despite boasting of second best sales
> month ever in
> August 2001
>
> 12. Isuzu- Nothing.
>
> 13. Mitsubishi-Nothing..
>
> 14. Nissan-Nothing.
>
> 15. Porsche-Nothing. Press release with condolences via the
> Porsche website.
>
> 16. Subaru- Nothing.
>
> 17. Suzuki- Nothing.
>
> 18. Toyota-Nothing despite claims of high sales in July and
> August 2001.
> Condolences posted on the website
>
> Whenever the time may be for you to purchase or lease a new
> vehicle, keep
> this information in mind. You might want to give more
> consideration to a car manufactured by an American-owned
> and / or American based company. Apart from Hyundai and
> Volkswagen, the foreign car companies contributed nothing
> at all to the citizens of the United States ...
>
> It's OK for these companies to take money out of this
> country, but it is apparently not acceptable to return some
> in a time of crisis. I believe we should not forget things
> like this. Say thank you in a way that gets their attention..

BUY YOUR NEXT VEHICLE FROM GM, FORD OR CHRYSLER.

Here are some interesting stastics supporting why we need to tell our representatives to give the loan the big three?

http://gmfactsandfiction.com/

May I suggest everyone interested in all sides of the union story read "I Heard You Paint Houses", by Frank, "The Irishman" Sheeran. The inside story of the mafia, the teamsters and Jimmy Hoffa. Get to know about intimidation. Human nature is such that no matter what one has (benefits/wages) it is never enough and we always want more. Reality soon evaporates from the argument. That's why Aesop's fable, The Goose That Laid the Golden Egg, withstand's the test of time and is taught to our children generation after generation. Organized labor has (see above examples) squeezed the neck of the industrial goose one too many times. Does anyone expect a 30 year retiree with a good pension and healthcare benefits that most don't enjoy to be critical of the union which fought for those benefits??? It wont happen.... even if the reality of the situation now is that those benefits may be, in part, responsible for the demise of yet another manufacturing segment (the US auto industry) in America. I hope that Unions continue to exist to safeguard and protect the American worker. However, the workers and unions must be willing to accept that when the goose is dead the golden eggs are finished. Suddenly the pension, health insurance and everything is gone.... (unless the taxpayer buy another goose).