EFCA

[mattycub]

So the next big fight in Congress is heating up: the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). Millions of dollars are being spent by both sides on advertising, talking heads are spinning like crazy, Senate votes are being counted, and the Republicans held up the nomination of Obama's Labor Secretary, Hilda Solis, for weeks over this very issue. The debate

Comments

[sunflower1969]

Anything that makes the GOP this apoplectic is completely worth supporting.

[fargonrob]

My father was in MMP and his union benefits helped so much, and were it not for the union it would have been bad.

The unions in the US became corrupt and mismanaged, and when that happened they became easy picking for business or the politicos.

I work at a place where the talk of union can get you fired, it's int he contract. I think that's WRONG, people died to give us the rights to form unions, and that right, like so many others, has been taken little by little.

We are going to have to be given those right back by law, this is a small step. We have to join the world.

[mattycub]

By "it's in the contract", do you mean literally that your employment agreement says discussion of unionization is cause for termination? That can't possibly be legal.

Thanks for sharing about your father, I never knew that.

[fargonrob]

There is a clause in the employee manual about no solicitation on company time. It has also been made clear we are not a union shop. It has also been made clear that talk of unionization can get you fired in this 'right to work state' where no reason is required to dismiss someone, and no need is required to quit.

Talk of a union would be considered solicitation. You have to get approval to sell avon and tupperware.

[pink_halen]

All the television ads cloud the issue. They are like the pro-choice/pro-life debate because both sides use language in a way that confuses rather than clears understanding. (They can't both be pro.)

Whatever we hear on television is probably amplified 100 times by lobbyests.
I don't think it serves either side to have the public calling their congress critters without understanding the implication of the bill.

[the_hankster]

fargonrob, unless I don't really understand the EFCA (always a possibility), I don't see why you think that it would help in your situation. It's my understanding that firing people for discussing a union is already illegal, if your company is already doing that I don't think there's anything in the EFCA that would stop them. What "rights" do you think the EFCA would give back to you?

[userid1999]

I'm a strong supporter of the EFCA. Robert Reich made a comment on it today on Marketplace that really sums up how I feel. Strong unions made for a strong middle class and robust living wages for a good portion of the country. Weakening unions has led to declining or stagnating wages for workers, which is bad for the consumer consumption that drives a good chunk of our economy.

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/03/11/pm_free_choice/

I would also add that the weakening of unions overall has made it harder for those remaining unions to stand up for their members. How many airline unions have had concessions forced down their throats and had their pensions abandoned in this anti-union environment? Overall, the people who have profited most from the shift away from pensions to 401k's have not been the working and middle class but rather the folks at the top.

[mattycub]

I'm with you.

As another point, and as I said to Dan below, it's been on my mind lately the role that unions have played in the history of gay rights and wether that should move us to show some solidarity with them. I remember when I was watching Milk being struck by how Harvey's alliance with the Teamsters was instrumental in strengthening the gay rights movement in SF. And I know the teachers union was one of the largest single contributers to the No on 8 campaign last year. Food for thought.