Unions Try to Get Rid of Secret Ballot
When running for president, Barack Obama promised American unions that he would push the Employee Free Choice Act through Congress. This act is horribly misnamed, for it does not aim to give employees any free choice; instead, unions want to use this bill in order to force themselves on employers and employees alike.
Unions have done a lot of good for employees. They have in quite some business made life and work better for your average employee. But they have also proved to be more than willing to bully employees, their own members and those who do not wish to become a member of the union, into submission.
The Employee Free Choice Act would let union organizers, as Froma Harrop writes for Real Clear Politics, ‘do an end run around secret-ballot elections: Companies would have to recognize a union if most workers signed cards in support of it.’
These majorities have been reached in the past and will be reached in the future if this act is approved by Congress and the next U.S. President by ‘repeated harassment, bullying and more inventive tactics, such as getting workers drunk, then sliding sign-up cards under their noses.’
Hopefully, Obama will break his promise to the unions. Employees would thank him for it.
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.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
“They have in quite some business made life and work better for your average employee.”
Having worked in union shops I have to dispute that. While they have made life better for piss-poor workers they’ve held back the rest and driven otherwise healthy companies bankrupt, to say nothing about the discriminatory tactics they apply when deciding who can become a member and hence get a job.