U.S. Election Night 2008

Post by **Cenedril_Gildinaur** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:58 pm

Yes, I agree. One of his early battles will the the Employee Free Choice Act, an Orwellian named act which gives free choice by removing the secret ballot requirement for forming a union.

Guns are a lower priority.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:58 pm

The free choice to decide to join a union is going to be taken away from the workers?!?!?!

I never heard that.

Post by **Cenedril_Gildinaur** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:09 pm

The EFCA removes the requirement for a secret ballot on whether or not to form a union.

It's in the bill, for those who care to find out.

Post by **River** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:19 pm

It's not required but is it forbidden?

Post by **Cenedril_Gildinaur** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:22 pm

I don't recall if it is actually forbidden, but the unions will not be required to offer it, even if someone demands it. It is not in the interest of the unions to offer it, as they often get enough cards to hold the election and many people who were willing to publicly say "we should vote to hold a union" are also privately willing to vote no in that election.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:26 pm

I really find myself wondering how many hourly-wage workers would turn down the chance to unionize right now. A lot of them feel pretty powerless, and a lot of them have been messed over for years and years now, with no recourse—stagnant wages, falling benefits, layoffs—while watching top management take home huge bonuses.

I'm not speaking to the secret ballot issue, just how many would vote "no" even in private.

Post by **Cenedril_Gildinaur** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:28 pm

You have a point, but I'd still want the ballot to be secret no matter how it turns out. If people with the secret ballot vote "yes", more power to them.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:30 pm

We still believe in that quaint concept of "majority rule" correct?

So if you have 50 workers at a company and 30 of them sign a card saying they want to be represented by the Untied Widget Workers, thats pretty much a majority by the way I read the numbers. And there sure was a clear decision on the part of every member who wanted to make a decision. Thirty signed the card for a union and 20 did not. In my math book, 30 is a majority each and every time.

Sounds right and fair and perfectly American to me.

Now if the new law said that a minority could bring in the union , well those would be fighting words. I would not stand for it. I would protest strongly. But I am an American and support the principle of majority rule according to the law.

And is it not really weird that in between the time you have a majority of people petition for a union election today, that a bunch of them, especially the leaders, managed to GET FIRED between the time the peition is submitted and the many months later when they finally get around to the actual election.

Post by **Holbytla** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:40 pm

Primula Baggins wrote:I really find myself wondering how many hourly-wage workers would turn down the chance to unionize right now. A lot of them feel pretty powerless, and a lot of them have been messed over for years and years now, with no recourse—stagnant wages, falling benefits, layoffs—while watching top management take home huge bonuses.

I'm not speaking to the secret ballot issue, just how many would vote "no" even in private.

Actually a fair number. There are lots of reasons of course, but one I know of for certain is that there is no guarantee of higher wages but a certainty of paying dues. People fear losing money.

And before any vote takes place you have to garner enough signatures to even request a vote. That stops the process many times well beforehand.

Post by **Cenedril_Gildinaur** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:43 pm

So you oppose the secret ballot, SF?

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:48 pm

Secret ballot - majority rule - the American Way - I am all for it.

Post by **Cenedril_Gildinaur** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:53 pm

So you support the secret ballot. Unfortunately the EFCA attacks the secret ballot by removing the requirement for the secret ballot.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:56 pm

Oh - I am sorry. i thought you were talking about voting in PUBLIC ELECTIONS for governmental positions.

I try to keep the affairs of electing my government and other decisions in my life outside of the government apart from each other.

Post by **Cenedril_Gildinaur** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:01 am

So you do oppose giving those who might be forming a union the secret ballot on that decision?

Why?

Post by **vison** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:09 am

Any vote on any subject for any reason ought to be by secret ballot. The only reason NOT to have a secret ballot is because of the intimidation factor.

I am a union supporter philosophically, but oppose any notion that any union certification be held without the secret ballot.

Post by **Inanna** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:26 am

Whats the reasoning/incentive to remove the secret ballot? I can't think of any.

Post by **vison** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 1:01 am

Mahima wrote:Whats the reasoning/incentive to remove the secret ballot? I can't think of any.

Everyone can see how everyone voted. Intimidation - a guy won't vote against whatever his buddies are voting for if they're watching.

Post by **yovargas** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 1:59 am

River wrote:Yeah, there's been a run on gun sales in CO too. It's a bit silly because first of all, Obama doesn't even take office until Jan. 20, second of all, he knows an across the board gun ban would never fly, and third of all, I think he has other things to worry about. But it's their money and I'm sure gun shops and sporting goods stores don't mind.

And fourthly, Obama doesn't favor stricter gun control, if my memory serves me correctly.

Post by **Cenedril_Gildinaur** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 2:00 am

Well, he has made one speech to that effect. On the other hand his party platform strengthened their anti-gun bais this time around.

Post by **Inanna** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 2:28 am

vison wrote:
Mahima wrote:Whats the reasoning/incentive to remove the secret ballot? I can't think of any.
Everyone can see how everyone voted. Intimidation - a guy won't vote against whatever his buddies are voting for if they're watching.

I mean the incentive to change the legislation. You can't have "intimidation" as an incentive to change the legislation. At least, not in public.