SEARCH
Corporate Ads Are Wrong. Employee Free Choice Would Increase Democracy |
|
Across the country, workers have made passage of the Employee Free Choice Act a major campaign issue. Big Business and deep-pocket front groups, such as the misnamed Center for Union Facts and the Employee Freedom Action Committee, are desperately trying to stop the legislation by running ads that attack candidates for their support of the legislation.
The pro-business, anti-worker front groups are claiming they are concerned about workers’ right to a private ballot in union elections. But in reality, the Employee Free Choice Act does not ban private ballots—it would give workers a choice about how they want to form their union, rather than management having sole control of that choice. The Employee Free Choice Act would finally give workers a free choice on whether to join a union and bargain and would increase workplace democracy by giving workers numerous opportunities to vote on conditions in the workplace, says Jack McKay, president of the Eastern Maine Labor Council.
During a recent press conference, McKay said:
The idea that these big businesses are out to protect the private ballot is exactly opposite of what they are doing: They’re out to stop workers from voting in the workplace. This is a ridiculous campaign. This is as absurd as PETA [People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals] calling for a pig roast. It is as absurd as the KKK [Ku Klux Klan] calling for civil rights.
Wal-Mart and other nonunion workers never vote to elect representatives to defend their interests. The fact is workers only get to vote by private ballot on working issues if they are union members. Nonunion workers never get to vote on workplace issues by private ballot. Ever.
At the press conference, the Eastern Maine Labor Council released a survey of 26 of its affiliated unions, which shows 221 workers were elected to office by private ballot, including 13 presidents, 13 vice-presidents, 12 secretaries, seven treasurers, 55 members of executive boards and an additional 121 other officers in various capacities. In addition, the locals conducted private ballot votes on 22 contracts or workplace issues.
McKay adds:
Our unions have a proud, democratic tradition, not out of some sentimental feeling toward democracy, but rather because that is the most effective, sustainable way to run a membership-driven organization. Most of our unions are decades old, some over 100 years old. They have thrived through the years precisely due to their nature as strong democracies, where worker members have a say in the governance of the organization, and this in turn greatly betters their working conditions. Private ballot voting is alive and well with union members.
These corporate front groups are set up by sleaze propagandist Richard Berman, who has slammed Mothers Against Drunk Driving on behalf of the alcohol industry and encouraged pregnant women to eat tuna, despite concerns about high levels of mercury. He recently bought ad space at a major Washington, D.C., Metro stop to run ads attacking unions, lawyers who sue companies for negligence, groups that support safe food practices and other groups.
McKay says the media has failed to fully analyze who is behind these ads and tell the truth about workplace democracy.
This corporate campaign is aimed precisely at keeping workers without a private vote on workplace issues. The fact that the group has managed to get away with claiming to be concerned with exactly what they are trying to prevent (workplace democracy), unfortunately, says a lot about the lack of analysis on the part of our media.
4 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
James Parks bio says he is proud of working on multi-racial elections in South Africa. I wonder if the South African government said we want to restore democracy for everyone, but to do so we need to take away the secret, private ballot, would he have thought that was a good idea?
The ends does not justify the means. Getting a union without the employees actually voting is undemocratic and it questions the ethics of all those who favor it. The most disgraceful part of this is that we have politicians joining up to support the romoval of democracy.
Dave, here’s the real deal: You’re obliquely referencing the Employee Free Choice Act, federal legislation the union movement supports to level the playing field for workers seeking to join unions.
For workers seeking to join a union, the Employee Free Choice Act would expand their options. They could vote on whether to join a union as they currently do—by secret ballot via Labor Board-run elections. Or, they could opt to sign cards indicating their support of a union. If 51 percent of the workforce signed cards, the workers would have a union.
The Employee Free Choice Act expands the options for America’s workers.
Get the details here: http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/
Tula, yYou are providing misleading information either on purpose or you don’t understand the Employee Free Choice Act. Workers will not be able to make the decision of whether to have a secret ballot or to get rid of it. Only the union collects organizing cards. If the union gets more than a majority to sign a card, the union can insist on instant recognition or can ask for an election (this isn’t the workers decision). Seems to me that the odds are pretty great that the organizer would not ask for an election. EFCA doesn’t level the playing field. It deprives workers of the right to a secret ballot. Anyone who argues differently is trying to mislead.
Dave:
The Employee Free Choice Act does what it says: Gives workers a free choice.