SEARCH
Know-Nothing Newt |
|
Grandstanding is a favorite pastime of the former speaker of the House, Republican Newt Gingrich. Truth, however, has never played a big role in his self-trumpeting.
In a recent Politico column, Gingrich advances a laundry list of falsehoods about the Employee Free Choice Act. It’s the latest grab at public attention in his angling for a place in the 2012 elections.
First, he pushes the lie that the Employee Free Choice Act takes away the secret ballot process for workers deciding whether to form a union. The Employee Free Choice Act does not take away the secret ballot. It gives to workers the right to use an already legal process for deciding on unionization—a streamlined process called majority sign-up, or card check.
The bill adds choice for workers, who will decide which process to use. The Employee Free Choice Act is an amendment to existing federal labor law that makes no change whatsoever in the current election procedures.
So, Newt: How about reading the Employee Free Choice Act text and pointing out where it says the secret ballot is taken away? Hint: You won’t be able to find it because it doesn’t exist.
After this straw man argument, Gingrich purports to have found another insidious provision of the bill—binding arbitration. He’s referring to a portion of the Employee Free Choice Act that would guarantee that workers at the bargaining table are able to achieve a contract.
The Employee Free Choice Act provides a process for helping parties in a newly formed union bargain a contract through mediation and arbitration, if necessary, to resolve outstanding disputes. These tools are necessary because 44 percent of newly formed unions never reach a first contract.
Current law actually provides an incentive for companies that fail to reach a contract. Managers negotiating a first contract with employees drag out the process as long as they can, sometimes literally for years.
Newt should talk with employees like Johanna Moon, a 25-year veteran of Trump Plaza in Atlantic City. Despite joining the UAW two years ago, Moon and her colleagues still do not have a contract. The workers formed a union because, despite many years on the job, they were living paycheck to paycheck, and some had no health coverage. If the Employee Free Choice Act was law, these workers would have a contract. Clearly, they need one badly.
Newt then sheds crocodile tears for the workers who didn’t vote for a union, saying a contract would be foisted upon them under the Employee Free Choice Act. Guess what, Newt? Probably not many workers would reject better wages and affordable health care. Would you?
Gingrich also sounds the [false] alarm over companies going out of business with unionized workforces. Here’s a little history lesson for you, Newt: The 1950s, a decade in which the United States saw its greatest unionization rate, was also, not coincidentally, among the most prosperous decades of American history.
Gingrich uses a discredited study by corporate mouthpiece Anna Layne-Farrar to assert that greater unionization would worsen unemployment. Economist Lawrence Mishel calls this “crackpot economics.” Mishel says that using the study’s logic, the United States would have “negative unemployment” as a result of the decrease in union membership over the past 30 years. In fact, many other countries, including England, Switzerland, Denmark and Norway, have higher unionization and lower unemployment than the United States.
Here’s someone else Newt needs to talk with: Colorado small business owner Larry Martinez. He’s one of the hundreds of business owners across the country who knows the freedom to form unions and bargain isn’t just good for workers—it’s good for the whole economy. Says Martinez:
I believe this bill is a smart piece of legislation, which makes it easier for workers to have a voice at the workplace. I am not frightened in the least by the concept of sitting with employees and negotiating around wages and benefits. Employee buy-in for making my company more profitable is in my best interest and that of my employees.
Profits. That’s an all-American concept we can all support, one that companies with unionized workers see more of because of the high productivity of a unionized workforce.
Newt then plays up the supposed bogeyman of government intervention in the private sector. But guess what, Newt: Those secret ballots are gathered by and counted by the government. The government already is in the process.
As for those billions Gingrich erroneously cites as being spent by unions on behalf of the Employee Free Choice Act? It isn’t the union movement spending that kind of money. It’s Gingrich’s corporate buddies who have launched a mega-million-dollar campaign to fight workers’ freedom to form unions and bargain for a better life.
The bottom line is that Gingrich is spewing more red herring arguments that aren’t based in fact and that serve only one bottom line: His political ambitions to ingratiate himself with reactionaries.
7 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Frankly, it does not matter if I agree or disagree with Newt Gingrich. I have my own views of unions and I’m sure you don’t want to know what they are, but I’ll tell you anyway.
There was a time when there was a place for unions…but that time has passed. It passed the moment you quit looking after union members and went after the almighty dollar. Why do you think GM and Chrysler are going into bankruptcy? It’s when unions saw to it that a line worker was paid the equivalent of management pay in most parts of the US instead of what was actually earned. It’s when union workers were allotted what most management in other parts of the US did not have. I know you feel entitled to what you get once you retire, but I can tell you…you are full of it! It’s clear that unions have done a thorough brainwashing of it’s members, so maybe I shouldn’t fault you so strongly, but I do. You have run GM and others that have caved into your demands into the ground. Where are you going to be when those companies fold or go into bankruptcy? It will be because union bosses stuffed their pockets at your expense. The last thing in the world that you will ever admit is that that is what happened. You have been told over and over that you “earned” it…not so. There are hard working stiffs all over this country that worked harder and longer than you did that not only decided that union membership was selling their soul, but also realized that that is NOT THE AMERICAN WAY! You are now reaping the rewards of all those dollars you put into your union, plus much, much more, but at the expense of all of us in the US. Now where are we? What will happen to the goods we bought through unions when we can no longer get the parts for them? Will we look lovingly at the union members that sold their souls and bankrupted the companies so they could all act like management? I don’t think so. No matter what the unions told you, you were not that important…but your money was!
I’m sorry if I hurt feelings, but you have hurt more than feelings. You have run countless companies overseas or worse yet, out of business because they cannot afford what the unions have made them concede to. So please pardon me if I feel no empathy for you. Having a piece of the pie would have paid nicely…but the whole pie…no way!
And to answer your question…no, I’m not a conservative Republican. I’m a person who worked their whole life and settled for a piece of the pie…and guess what…I sleep much better at night than you ever will. Also, my bottom line is that unions are spewing more red herring arguments that aren’t based in fact and that only serve one bottom line…more money in the union pocket and your pocket, but at the expense of taxpaying Americans. If the government has to take over your pension fund, where do you think the money will come from to pay for it…my pocket and my children’s pockets…and that is unforgivable!
Oh, and I also wanted to comment on the post by “gimmegimme” regarding unions being at fault for Detroit’s current issues. Management let it happen! Many of the things unions pushed for was because of poor or weak management practices. The unions certainly deserve their fair share of the blame here, but ultimately management either caused or let it happen.
Remember, it is often said 80% of the failures are a result of the system, and management is ultimately responsible for the system! (But perhaps it could be said in a strong union environment maybe it should be more like 70/30 or 65/35.)
It is a matter of degrees. And when two main parties are involved, there’s always a lot of finger-pointing at the other. It takes real wisdom and discernment to cut through all that and get to the point where something genuine can be learned in aiding future actions.
So now that these two parties have failed us, we now bring in the REALLY BIG PARTY - the government. Yeah, like that’s gonna help! (Big Biz + Big Labor + Big Government = 3 ring circus)
Unless PrezBO and the democrats continue to expand the government footprint, as it stands right now the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation is not supported by tax payer dollars only by premiums paid by pension funds. http://www.pbgc.gov is where you can research it. At the currant rate there is no telling how long the government power grab will continue, we cant rely on unions to help put an end to it. I am so disappointed in the union movement
I am somewhat in the middle of this, and know that BOTH big business and big labor have spent significant resources on their respective sides of the EFCA issue. There has also been a lot of attention to the issue by small businesses as well.
The possibility of not having a secret ballot is what frightens people the most. And it’s not just business, but I’ve heard from otherwise union friendly people, that they oppose it too - it just doesn’t make sense. I suspect that this will prove to be a negotiation “bone” that will be pretty quickly discarded. Politically it just doesn’t seem viable, and will certainly produce more ill will than it’s worth.
As far as “red herrings” and “strawmen,” this article has its fair share too. I’ve read some of these findings and various reports - they are probably not as conclusive (in statistics supporting union stances on history) as made out to be. There are other good studies that show there are nuances here. Big labor does have an agenda too. The reader would do well to simply do a Google on the various topics, and decide for themselves.
If it is retooled, with some common sense, EFCA might actually be good for the country.
Look, I have had my problems with certain union leaders. However the bottom line is that organized labor is the ONLY tool workers have in this country to help them achieve decent wages, benefits and protection from unfair bosses!
Despite my disagreement with some of labor’s hiearchy, I fully support EFC! because it is the only viable solution to a growing tide of on the job injustice and a shrinking labor movement! WE NEED EMPLOYEE FAIR CHOICE!
It sounds like you gimmegimme folks have been listening to too much of that “unbiased” news on the Fox network and it’s poached your brains.
The unions will ALWAYS have a prominent place in our society because of the really rotten employee practices that occur on a daily basis in some really BAD companies.
If all companies offered full time work at living wages with full benefits it might be a different story. The majority of people who bad mouth unions have never been in one.
I was moved by a recent trip to the ” old folk home,” when a discussion about the unions came up. “Boy,” we could never afford to stay here if we hadn’t saved all these years thanks to solid employment in our union job. In fact, we owe everthing we have to union employment. (from an eighty year old man.)
When you hear the truth, the rest is just cheap whiskey!
‘zebra8835′ is right in that it is only if you have had the ‘genuine article’ of actually being in a union can you understand the incredible significance of unions and what those in unions have been able to achieve. For one thing, we have had an upwardly mobile increasingly stronger middle class as a result. Our economy was on the upswing, because people were able to buy the things they needed and wanted. Can you say that today? It is not the unions that have caused the decline in our economy, but rather it is the unions that have been responsible for many, and I mean MANY of the positive and beneficial things that we currently have in the workplace. Remember the saying “Thank unions for the 40 hour work week.” That is not idle chatter. That is a real outcome of unions. The list is extensive, but now we are seeing the decline of every single labor advantage and regulation that unions have been responsible for.
The main point is that although many people can dispute and argue about the benefits and/or disadvantages of unions, one thing is very clear. Unions are the best thing we have today for worker protections. True, there will always be ways they can be made better and stronger, but without them we will continue to be at the mercy of greedy capitalists whose main concern is their companies’ bottom line profits. It is these companies that have allowed the outsourcing, because they did not want to pay fair wages to Americans. As a result hundreds of thousands of skilled American workers have lost their jobs.
I would much rather err on the side of worker protection than on the side of those few CEOs and corporate bosses who claim that they know what’s best for the other 98% of us. I would rather put my vote in protecting the little guy from serious wage deprivation and lack of benefits, because it is with the “little guy”, us, the average hard working American, that has made this country great, and it will be us that will make this country great again. Unions will help us do this. We really have to work together on this.