McGovern says the secret ballot is 'a matter of principle'

[Omaha Steve]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22422.html

By BEN SMITH | 5/12/09 3:52 PM EDT

George McGovern’s name has long been synonymous with the kind of principled, doctrinaire and politically suicidal liberalism that Democrats from Bill Clinton to Barack Obama work to avoid.

But McGovern, 87, has reemerged in recent months on the other side of the political spectrum, as a prominent foe of a key piece of the progressive agenda: the labor-backed Employee Free Choice Act.


George McGovern is back in the political spotlight as a prominent foe of the Employee Free Choice Act. (AP)
Photo: AP

The liberal icon’s public break with the left has produced from his old allies anger, confusion and a failed campaign to persuade him to change his mind on the legislation, which would give workers the option of joining a union by signing cards rather than by voting in a secret ballot.

Instead, McGovern has stuck to his guns in an unlikely campaign that began in the pages of The Wall Street Journal , where he wrote that, for Democrats, abandoning the secret ballot would be “a betrayal of what we have always championed.”

Flirting with sacrilege, he compared his opposition to the bill to “my early and lonely opposition to the Vietnam War.”

McGovern’s stance may say more about the iconic, idiosyncratic former senator and Democratic presidential nominee than about the cause, but his words were repeated in television ads across the Midwest by business-backed groups, and labor leaders from Sioux Falls to Washington took note.


FULL story at link.

[bluestateguy]

1. He should encourage his old campaign team from '72 to help defeat the bill

Then we'll all be doomed, I tell you!

[Winterblues]

2. It really doesn't matter the bill is doomed anyway

A small Majority of Democrats are for it and virtually every single Republican against it. There are no where near the votes needed to pass it. Even though everyone knows the "votes aren't there" it will still be put up for a vote as compared to Impeachment which was never even considered..

[doc03]

3. I agree with him, the EFCA effectively eliminates the secret

ballot. I am a Union member myself but all this does make the law do the Union organisers job. It also sets workers up for intimidation from their fellow workers and Union organizers.

[bbinacan]

4. Well said. n/t

[Omaha Steve]

5. I was fired for union organizing in 1980 NLRB case # 17-CA-9763 online

I'm AFSCME BTW.

My case file at the NLRB: http://www.nlrb.gov/shared_files/Board%20Decisions/261/261-38.pdf

I think you need to do some research. EFCA doesn't take away the private ballot. Currently the EMPLOYER has the choice to accept card check, or demand a private ballot. AT&T, Harley Davidson, and other big name companies have accepted chard check and stayed neutral while workers organize.

Who holds the power in threatening workers? The company can illegally fire, say we will move to someplace else, etc... What power does a union thug have?

Every CEO in America has a contract with the board of directors. Shouldn't workers have a contract too?

Look at this list of organizations that have endorsed EFCA: http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/allies.cfm


To see a union member swallow the right wing lie told by people like Rush is way more than discouraging. Need I say more?


Read the act for yourself and prove me wrong: # Read the text of the Employee Free Choice Act: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1409:

* Download a summary of the bill (PDF): http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/upload/EFCA_Summary.pdf

# Key facts about the Employee Free Choice Act: http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/10keyfacts.cfm

[doc03]

7. The way I understand it if you have a workplace

with say 100 people you go to people to sign a card. You have 45 sign the card so then the people that are backing the Union will know who didn't sign. Then the Union and its backers will know who they need to (convince) to sign the card. That is not democracy in my opinion. The organizer isn't going to be going to the membership and saying we are going to have a secret ballot vote on Union representation. To claim you aren't taking the secret ballot away is just BS to me. The link for the EFCA doesn't work. But the AFL summary says exactly what I said when a majority of the workers sign a card the company has to recognize the Union, it says absolutely nothing about any secret ballot. I have E-mailed both my Senators and my Congressman saying I oppose the bill. Convince me I am wrong about the Union intimidating workers if they chose to.

[Omaha Steve]

8. You didn't read anything yet

http://progressivestates.org/node/23073

State Laws Allowing Majority Sign-up for Unions Show why Employee Free Choice Act is Fair Option for Workers

It seems relatively simple. The proposed federal Employee Free Choice Act would give employees the freedom to form a union when a majority of workers sign cards saying that they want one, avoiding the often months of employer harassment that have inevitably accompanied traditional National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) election processes.

Ignoring Evidence of Majority Sign-up Success in the States: Yet the anti-union lobby in Washington, D.C. has been churning out propaganda about the supposed horrors of coercion workers would face by unions if the Employee Free Choice Act was enacted. They inevitably tell hypothetical stories about what could happen -- but studiously ignore the fact that states around the country already allow groups of public and private employees to form unions through majority sign-up procedures without any evidence of the coercion they conjure up.

Just to reinforce the lack of evidence of union coercion, a new report from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign was released this week examining the whole history of majority sign-up in that state. The report found that between the years 2003 and 2009, 21,197 public sector workers used majority sign-up procedures allowed by state law to form unions with only one complaint about union coercion filed during that whole period -- and even that complaint was dismissed as without merit by the state Labor Relations Board.

In fact, across the country since 2003, half a million workers have formed unions using majority sign-up procedures, either under state law or through voluntary agreements made with employers, and there is no significant evidence of union coercion under the process. If there was, you can bet the anti-union lobby would be citing those problems every day, yet instead they attempt to ignore the existing success of majority sign-up procedures for workers who have access to them.

Coercion by Employers under Federal NLRB Procedures: Compare this to the existing National Labor Relations Board process where an estimated one-in-five union organizers or activists can expect to be fired as a result of their activities in a union election campaign. A 2000 Human Rights Watch report said the failure to protect workers under U.S. election procedures was so profound that the so-called secret ballot election" process failed to meet international human rights standards. Just this week, the Center for American Progress Action Fund released an animation illustrating how brutal present NLRB procedures are for workers.

Promoting Freedom to Form Unions: Given the benefits of unionization in raising wages, spreading majority sign-up at both the federal and state level to put more money in household budgets and stimulate the economy should be an imperative for all elected leaders.

State laws allowing majority sign-up for groups of public and private employees have been enacted in California, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Washington, and Wisconsin. Examples of these statutes include Oregon Revised Statutes, 243.682 for public employees and New York Chapter 31, Article 20, Section 705 covering both public employees and a number of private industries.

So you've got one system -- NLRB elections with a demonstrated history of massive, overwhelming employer abuse -- and another system -- majority signup operating in many states with noevidence of any of the abuses alleged by opponents. If it works in the states, why not bring its benefits to more employes?

Resources
American Rights At Work - Majority Sign-up Q&A and Half a Million and Counting and Free and Fair? How Labor Law Fails U.S. Democratic Election Standards,
AFL-CIO - The Employee Free Choice Act: Will it Lead to Coercion of Workers by Unions? and Expanding Workers' Collective Bargaining Rights: Majority Sign-up/Card Check for Public Sector Workers
Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) - Dropping the Ax: Illegal Firings During Union Election Campaigns, 1951-2007 and The Benefits of Unionization
Human Rights Watch - Unfair Advantage: Workers' Freedom of Association in the United States under International Human Rights Standards
Center for American Progress Action Fund - How Not to Join a Union: Labor Law Gives Workers a Raw Deal
Posted: May 7, 2009 - 11:31am by Nathan Newman

[doc03]

9. Yes I did, it takes the right to a secret ballot away

this is America our whole system is based on the secret ballot.

[Omaha Steve]

10. No the choice is on the card

Card check OR secret ballot. The card can be sent to a third party so the union and the employer don't know who signed a card, who asked for a secret ballot, etc...

You didn't read the act!

[doc03]

16. I read all I could find on your links and

see absolutely nothing like that. What do you think about a Union that would give up over 200 grievances to save a Union official that was caught stealing numerous times? What about whenever the company hires only management and Union officials get their friends and family hired? What about Union officials that have had their driveways paved with company paid for concrete and labor? That's the kind of stuff I have seen for around 40 years. It doesn't stand a chance of getting passed anyway.

[Omaha Steve]

30. I'm sorry the link to the act I posted yesterday is dead

Here are the Bills in Congress. So perhaps you can show me where it eliminates the secret ballot now?


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/thomas

Items 1 through 2 of 2

1. H.R.1409 : To amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish an efficient system to enable employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to provide for mandatory injunctions for unfair labor practices during organizing efforts, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Miller, George (introduced 3/10/2009) Cosponsors (225)
Committees: House Education and Labor
Latest Major Action: 3/10/2009 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.

2. S.560 : A bill to amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish an efficient system to enable employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to provide for mandatory injunctions for unfair labor practices during the organizing efforts, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Kennedy, Edward M. (introduced 3/10/2009) Cosponsors (39)
Committees: Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Latest Major Action: 3/10/2009 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

[readmoreoften]

13. Right-wing blabbering point. And false. /nt

[billyoc]

31. You are a liar and a disgrace to your union.

[Omaha Steve]

35. I wouldn't say liar

Disgruntled and may work in a closed shop. On the other hand, no union is ever better than the effort the MEMBERS put into it. Paying dues isn't enough. If your not happy, run for the board or an office. Go to a meeting and find out what goes on. Many many variables.

[mitchtv]

39. that's what I did ,when a lousy steward muffed a good grievance

I became a steward . and thanks for reminding me of the value of the membership and what they put into it. When the union is strong in the unit you find few of the gripers. But always remember that the shop stweward is the face of the union, unfortunately many stewards are just slackers and coast. That should be taken care of by the membership and the officers must listen. Remember, the lousy stewards are there for a reason, to assign to the non members and scabs who always end up in trouble and in need of representing. The biggest gripe by members I saw was the enormus resources being used by the union to save the jobs of workers the members themselves believe shuold be canned. Always remind them of our leags duties to represent everyone, and ask them if that isn;t what they'd want for themselves

[gratuitous]

12. Spot on

And puts the lie to McGovern's position.

[Touchdown]

6. Not well said. Load of crap.

Does the company respect you and your privacy?

Do they monitor your phone calls?
Internet useage?
Track keystrokes?
Inspect lockers?
Search purses?
require drug tests?
Install badge scanners on bathroom doors?
have surveilance cameras on the shop floor?
Watch the door to see if your late?
Send detectives to your house to make sure you are sick?

Now we are supposed to believe that they REALLY AND FOR TRUE care about our "secret ballot" rights?

Ever heard of a petition? That's what card check is. A petition. Nothing more democratic than that.

[readmoreoften]

14. The scabs should rest assured anyway--they are usually the nasty ones.

Frankly, I don't care much for the "sacred" secret vote anyway. Most of the homophobes, union-busters, and racists don't care to hide their opinion anyway. And those who pretend otherwise are manipulative monsters. If votes were public there'd be more democratic debate. The secrecy does nothing but benefit the powers that be.

[Bill McBlueState]

21. I think people don't really understand what democracy is anymore

People think democracy means you just go to your private little booth, touch the screen, and then go home. The entire civic aspect of advocating for your position within the community is being forgotten.

[anigbrowl]

29. Same here. I think the secret ballot is a good idea, worth keeping.

[Postman]

42. Bullshit.

You can still have a secret ballot. The Act doesn't prevent that from happening.

What they're really afraid of is the provision in the Act that mandates arbitration of labor disputes that corporations so skillfully delay for months and years...

[Juche]

11. Has anyone explained to him that EFCA keeps the secret ballot

Here is how it currently works.

If workers want a union the company picks whether you do it via card check or secret ballot. They tend to choose secret ballot since it is easier to intimidate workers.

With EFCA the workers get the choice between secret ballot and card check.


Does he not know this?

[mitchtv]

15. poor thing

obviously senile

[doc03]

17. Oh since I don't think employees should be

put in the position of being intimidated by Union or Company thugs I am senile and a scab I suppose. Let me tell you something I have been on 3 strikes in 39 years, one was 101 days the other was 10 1/2 months. Don't give me this BS about solidarity, we had solidarity and after being out on strike for months the Union agrees to the same contract they turned down before the strike, then they tell you have to vote for it or you won't have job. I have worked in a smaller company all these years and we have always been the sacrificial lambs for the bigger companies.

[Omaha Steve]

18. And what would you have without a union?

In my links are the actual proposed act. Where does it say the end of secret ballots?

IF you are unhappy with your union leadership, talk to your friends at work and vote them out. When it comes to votes for officers, that is and be secret ballot.

[doc03]

19. I read your link on the actual proposed act

and in the second paragraph it mentions a card check, I saw nothing anywhere about a secret ballot. I would have to write a book to fully explain this. Last summer our company was bought by a bigger company so the Union gave the new owner a two month extension to negotiate a new contract. In that two month period the economy went to hell and we have been working under extensions since then. So now the new owner decided to shut the entire company down because of the economy and we have no job. There is nothing stopping the owner from selling us to a non-union company now, they can just not extend the contract after June 1. The company anounced we are up for sale last week, a new company can come in and say if you want to work with no Union we will rehire you, if not get lost. I have less than a year until I can get SS and my pittance of a pension (if I don't lose it in the mean time). Our health insurance was supposed to stay in effect for 2 years if we are laid off, what if the company just says we aren't extending the contract any longer? What do we do go on strike? To make a long story short the owner that has shut us down was hand picked by the Union.

[Touchdown]

22. There's never been a such thing as "secret ballot"

It's a red herring. Management has the ability, and they usually act on it, to look over your shoulder as you vote, taking note of how you vote. Some less than scrupulous members of the NLRB even give the results to management before it's made public.

As far as unions intimidating workers, I call bullshit! Nobody can intimidate or pressure workers unless their paycheck is involved, and there's only one side that holds those paychecks. Unions ain't it!

[doc03]

23. Nobody can intimidate or pressure workers unless their

paycheck is involved. The Union organizer and the workers that support the Union can't make life miserable for someone that doesn't want to join the Union, now who are you trying to bullshit? I got a taste of that when I was just 16 almost 45 years ago to this day. I only had worked in this Hotel/Restaurant for a few days when someone came to me and said they were having a meeting at a local bar that night to try and start a Union. I was 16 and my father wouldn't let me have the car to go to the meeting. From that time on the so called adult employees were on my ass constantly until I just quit the job after a few weeks.
If it is the case like you say there has never been a secret ballot introduce a bill that makes sure the workers have a fair secret ballot. Don't try to fool people into thinking there is a secret ballot when that bill will effectively eliminate it. You can deny it and maybe you can fool enough people into thinking differently, good luck.

[Touchdown]

26. Examples please. Links to actual intimidation stories from legit sources

Personal experience is colored by feelings of being "wronged" by whoever crossed you. Hypotheticals and innuendos about mob ties and Hoffa history are tools of big business.

Prove intimidation by peers. Not peer pressure, because that works both ways. "If you vote a union in, then you'll lose your bonus!" That was an actual argument made last year when an org in AT&T was going through the card check. Card check won, the subsequent vote, or what you stupidly call "secret ballot" lost by one. Loss of bonus waas cited as the main reason for most voting no. They didn't get a bonus this year anyway, even though the company took in $13M in profit last year.

The bill does not eliminate the ballot option. Learn to read!:eyes:

[doc03]

28. I read it, it does, technically it's still there

but a Union organizer isn't going to come in and say we are going to take a Union vote by secret ballot. He will come to you and say we are trying to form a Union and we would like you to sign this card. I never ever said the company isn't above intimidating workers and the same goes for the Union. I remember a man named Jock Yablonski that ran against Tony Boyle for UMWA President. I remember a man named Ed Sadlowski that ran against the establishment in the USWA. Movies like On the Water Front were not just fiction. How about the movie about the harassment the women in the iron ore fields went through, that wasn't fiction. Here's one all you have to do is google Union harrasment:
http://manoa.hawaii.edu/irc/JF20088.pdf

[billyoc]

34. Oh, so first it eliminated the ballot, now it's "technically in there".

Were you scabbing then or are you scabbing now?

(Here's a hint, BOTH)

[Touchdown]

40. That's because unions don't get voted in by "secret ballot"

They never do. The most effective tool for forming unions in the workplace is card check. It's been proven time and again.

I really wish you would stop adding the non-existent "secret" term when you talk of workplace ballots. "Secret" in any workplace is an orwellian term.

[Omaha Steve]

38. From the Library of Congress

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d111:4:./temp/~bdROEQ:@@@L&summ2=m&|/bss/|

SUMMARY AS OF:
3/10/2009--Introduced.

Employee Free Choice Act of 2009 - Amends the National Labor Relations Act to require the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to certify a bargaining representative without directing an election if a majority of the bargaining unit employees have authorized designation of the representative (card-check) and there is no other individual or labor organization currently certified or recognized as the exclusive representative of any of the employees in the unit.

The key is the word IF! (if a majority)


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.560:

SEC. 2. STREAMLINING UNION CERTIFICATION.

(a) In General- Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 159(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(6) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, whenever a petition shall have been filed by an employee or group of employees or any individual or labor organization acting in their behalf alleging that a majority of employees in a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining wish to be represented by an individual or labor organization for such purposes, the Board shall investigate the petition. If the Board finds that a majority of the employees in a unit appropriate for bargaining has signed valid authorizations designating the individual or labor organization specified in the petition as their bargaining representative and that no other individual or labor organization is currently certified or recognized as the exclusive representative of any of the employees in the unit, the Board shall not direct an election but shall certify the individual or labor organization as the representative described in subsection (a).

`(7) The Board shall develop guidelines and procedures for the designation by employees of a bargaining representative in the manner described in paragraph (6). Such guidelines and procedures shall include--

`(A) model collective bargaining authorization language that may be used for purposes of making the designations described in paragraph (6); and

`(B) procedures to be used by the Board to establish the validity of signed authorizations designating bargaining representatives.'.

(b) Conforming Amendments-

(1) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD- Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 153(b)) is amended, in the second sentence--

(A) by striking `and to' and inserting `to'; and

(B) by striking `and certify the results thereof,' and inserting `, and to issue certifications as provided for in that section,'.

(2) UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES- Section 8(b) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 158(b)) is amended--

(A) in paragraph (7)(B) by striking `, or' and inserting `or a petition has been filed under section 9(c)(6), or'; and

(B) in paragraph (7)(C) by striking `when such a petition has been filed' and inserting `when such a petition other than a petition under section 9(c)(6) has been filed'.

[doc03]

24. At this time I would probably still have a job. n/t

[mitchtv]

25. I meant that G Mc Govern was oviously senile

I too have been through strikes and gave up a lot along the way, But I would never betray the union, It is our key to prosperity and what is more important than the higher salaries to employees is due process.

[billyoc]

32. Yes, that's right, you are scabbing right now.

Your actions are those of any other scab.

[alarimer]

20. I disagree with the first sentence.

Having principles is not suicidal, unless winning is more important than anything else. Clinton and most of today's Democrats do not have any principles.

There are a few exceptions, mainly Kucinich and Feingold. Even Obama swings with the wind. Notice his backtracking from a lot of campaign promises and from single-payer.

I do think that card check is important. Actually all the bill does is give the union (the workers that is) the choice of whether to have a secret ballot or not, instead of the company.

[ljm2002]

27. EFCA does not "remove the secret ballot"...

...it simply changes WHO it is who gets to decide. Rather than the business owners getting to decide, EFCA lets the workers decide.

So either McGovern has not read and understood the bill, or he's getting too old to rub two brain cells together -- or there's something else going on.

He was the very first politician I worked for, way back when. I fought to allow him a place on the ballot ( must have been the primaries, I'm too old to remember now :-) ) in Montana. I remember arguing with folks, telling them, you know this isn't a vote for him, it's a vote for fairness and for letting a candidate have his place on the ballot and his chance to be heard and make his case to try and get votes. I actually was able to convince more than a few people to sign the petition that way.

So although I wonder about his motivations, I cannot bring myself to make assumptions about them. I will say, it is very sad for me to see him take this anti-union position.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our second quarter 2009 fund drive.
Donate and you'll be automatically entered into our daily contest.
New prizes daily!



No purchase or donation necessary. Void where prohibited. Click here for more information.

[omega minimo]

36. ExCUUUUSE ME?

"synonymous with the kind of principled, doctrinaire and politically suicidal liberalism............"

I hate this sort of snot nosed, maleducated, blase, revisionist, disrepectful, trite throwaway line. Who is this writer?

It's CYNICAL bullshit. A wordy wonky worthless point of view.

Ass. :thumbsdown:

[billyoc]

37. No fool like an old fool.

Can't somebody read the fucking bill to him?!

[Omaha Steve]

41. The new Stars Come Out for EFCA video

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x312248