|
Post by dgriffin on May 8, 2009 14:17:43 GMT -5
Union members urge passing of Employee Free Choice Act(WKTV) - Union workers across the state are out on highway overpasses today, calling on Congress to pass the Employee Free Choice Act. Three members of the Communications Workers of America were doing this very thing today. they were holding up a sheet size sign saying "hey Congress: Employee Free Choice Act now." The employee free choice act is legislation that would make it easier for employees to form, join or assist labor organizations. A version of the bill passed the House in 2007, but it failed in the Senate. The latest version was re-introduced in both the House and the Senate in March. What it basically does is allow the workers themselves to decide to hold a union vote if they have enough support, rather than making it a decision by the employer to allow one. www.wktv.com/news/local/44599372.htmlHelp me out here. Is this the bill that mandates open ballots, instead of secret ballots? So that your co-workers will know how you vote?
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on May 8, 2009 20:47:44 GMT -5
And more importantly so that your EMPLOYERS know too! But yes, you are correct that is one in the same!
|
|
|
Post by frankcor on May 9, 2009 9:04:43 GMT -5
Why can't they let workers decide to unionize with a secret ballot? It seems the open voting leaves opportunities for intimidation by employers and union thugs alike.
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on May 9, 2009 15:17:34 GMT -5
So, we've got union workers advocating for it as well as employers. Is that because each thinks the intimidation of an open vote might work for their particular faction as the expense of the other?
Seems like some PhD. candidate would have already done the research on those possibilities. Maybe it varies per industry or some other factor that puts workers and employers on different sides, but never in the same type of business.
Interesting. I would think the secret ballot is a mainstay of democracy and the way decisions are made in a free society.
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on May 14, 2009 12:41:40 GMT -5
I just don't see how this is a benefit to the employee. I thought the whole reason it was a secret ballot was because of the anti-union movement and the employer intimidation factors and employee retribution factors... For example: ee1 ee2 ee3 and ee4 want to unionize. EOR does not want a union. ee1 is the weakest of the three employees. So EOR harasses ee1 and threatens everything but the kitchen sink. ee1 caves and votes no. ee4 witnesses these threats and is concerned about repercussions too so ee4, likewise, votes no. Under an open ballot, EOR subsequently fires ee2 and ee3 for supporting unionization. ee2 and ee3 brutally assault ee1 and ee4 for voting against unionization. And EOR fires ee1 and ee4 for missing too much work.
Because 4 is too small, assume that under a secret ballot, no one knows who voted which way and that no one can figure it out. Now, ee2 and ee3 are unable to take out their anger on ee1 and ee4. And EOR can't fire anyone.
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on May 14, 2009 13:42:41 GMT -5
I think I followed that. I was figuring some grad student has already taken advantage of the available data and figured out whether an open non-secret ballot would be to the advantage of the union or the employees who wanted their privacy. It used to be the secret ballot protected workers from vengeance from employers. But I guess today, the worker has to worry about payback from his fellow workers or the union if he votes opposite of their desires. I suppose either can be the case, depending on the situation. But a secret ballot still means people make up their own minds and vote accordingly. Isn't that democracy? So, seems to me, with little background on the issue, that whomever is arguing for an open ballot has something in mind other than the good of employees.
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on May 14, 2009 18:53:20 GMT -5
I think you stated it best, the employers are in favor so they can dissuade those who support unionization. And the unions support it because they can hassle the employees not in favor of unionization. Either way, the employEE loses!
|
|