Spread the Wealth II

Help Support Steer Planet:

AAOK

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
5,264
Location
Rogers, Ar

Letter Opposing the “Employee Free Choice Act"
June 20, 2007

TO THE MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE:

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world’s largest business federation representing more than three million businesses and organizations of every size, sector, and region, urges you to oppose cloture on the motion to proceed to consideration of either H.R. 800 or S. 1041, the “Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA),” which is expected to be voted on this week.

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), enacted more than 70 years ago, established a system of industrial democracy that is similar in many respects to the nation’s system of political democracy. This system allows employees to determine whether they wish to be represented by a particular union through a federally supervised secret ballot election overseen by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). It protects the interests of unions and employers, but most importantly, employees, by ensuring that both sides have an opportunity to make their case, and those employees are able to express their decision in private—free from coercion and intimidation.

Secret ballot elections have long been recognized as the preferred method for determining representation questions. However, under certain conditions, a union and an employer are allowed to agree to union recognition through the so-called “card check” process. EFCA would amend the NLRA by giving unions the right to achieve recognition solely through the “card check” process, thus permitting labor unions to avoid secret ballot elections. Under the card check approach, union organizers collect signatures of employees on authorization cards and present them as representing the true intent of the workers. However, as the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals observed, “Workers sometimes sign union authorization cards not because they intend to vote for the union in the election, but to avoid offending the person who asks them to sign, often a fellow worker, or simply to get the person off their back.”1 Therefore, the card check process exposes employees to abuse, threats, and intimidation all in the name of the union accumulating the required number of signatures. EFCA would elevate this inferior card check process to the principle method of recognizing a union, thereby eliminating the employees’ long-standing right to secret ballot elections.

Due to the inherent and long recognized problems with the card checks process, it should come as no surprise that Americans overwhelmingly prefer the time honored secret ballot process over card check schemes. In a recent poll by McLaughlin and Associates, almost 9 in 10 voters agree that workers should continue to have the right to a federally supervised secret ballot election when deciding whether or not to organize a union. Even union members themselves recognize that secret ballot elections are the fairest way to choose whether to form a union. In a poll by Zogby International, union members overwhelmingly (84% to 11%) indicated that employees should have the right to specifically vote on whether to join a union.

Despite this, unions are now emphasizing the card check process in their organizing drives, not because they do not win secret ballot elections—they win over 50%—but because it eliminates any chances of losing. As an open-ended process, they can keep their campaign going as long as necessary rather than resolve the issue on a specific date as with an election. Not only are employees often targeted for intimidation, but the card check process also often leads to other coercive tactics, known as “corporate campaigns.” These campaigns are designed to pressure employers through demonstrations, false and misleading stories in news media, and other public expressions to recognize unions as the exclusive bargaining representative of their employees without having to go through an election. These tactics are how organized labor's leadership intends to restore its declining membership base in the private sector.

Reliance on stale 1930’s rhetoric that falsely castigates employers will only perpetuate organized labor’s current membership difficulties. The answer to organized labor's failure to get more members lies in developing an agenda and message that is relevant and attractive to the modern workforce not in subverting time-honored and proven election procedures that protect an employee's right to vote in secret free from coercion by either side.

In addition to its card check provisions, EFCA also contains a provision to impose mandatory interest arbitration of first contracts. Interest arbitration would set all the terms of the initial contract between an employer and a union, including wages and benefits, but also other provisions typically in collective bargaining agreements, such as outsourcing and union security clauses. While sometimes used in the public sector, binding interest arbitration is completely unprecedented in the private sector. The idea of government arbitrators determining contract terms and what business decisions must be taken to meet those commitments is simply beyond the pale.

Finally, EFCA includes provisions to increase penalties on employers for certain violations of the NLRA. The fact that these provisions apply only to employer violations and not to union violations illustrates the bias inherent in EFCA. Union coercion is no less contemptible than employer coercion. For these reasons, the Chamber strongly urges you to oppose cloture on the motion to proceed to EFCA. The Chamber will include votes on, or in relation to, this issue in our annual How They Voted scorecard.

Sincerely,

R. Bruce Josten

1 NLRB v. Village IX Inc., 723 F.2d 1360, 1371 (7th Cir. 1983). These views of the court on card checks as not indicative of true employee intent are reflected in other case law and are far from unique.
 

AAOK

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
5,264
Location
Rogers, Ar

As Barack Obama downsizes his promises to cut taxes for the middle class, it brings to mind how Bill Clinton did the same.  Clinton then reversed course right after his 1992 election and raised everybody’s taxes instead.

The original Obama promise was higher taxes only for incomes over $250,000; then it slipped to $200,000; then Joe Biden said it’s $150,000.  Will that slippage continue?

Bill Clinton originally drew his line at $200,000, but eventually dropped it to around $25,000.  But a $200,000 income in 1992 would be the same as a $300,000 income today.  Obama is depicting more people than Clinton did as “wealthy” and deserving of higher taxes.

In this part of the country, the Clinton years were the worst since Hoover, economically speaking.  The stock market fiasco of today is nothing more than an adjustment to the apparent election of a "Business Killer" president. 
 

Dusty

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,097
This is why Obama scares me..  His redistribution of wealth policies are exactly what will be the downfall of this country. 

There really is no nice way to say this, but, welfare, socialized medicine, etc..(wealth distribution, socialism) is essentially subsidizing the procreation and living of people who are too lazy and aren't intelligent enough to take care of themselves.  Now, I'm not saying that they're aren't people out there that need help(mentally handicapped people etc.), but to give a check to someone who is of sound mind and body is just perpetuating the problem of people who don't contribute procreating and having children who won't contribute and so on.  There gets to be a greater % of the population that doesn't have to pay taxes so they elect leaders(Obama) who will essentially give them something for nothing.  After awhile the % of people who are supporting the non-producers will get small enough and the burden heavy enough that they will just say screw it and quit. 

The preceding paragraph is what lies at the heart of why the left is essentially evil.  It's a "happy" evil because we are "helping" people, but it is in an evil none the less and it will be the ultimate downfall of America.  We need to get back to when people were expected to take care of themselves.  Where parents are in charge of raising their own children how they see fit.  When if you wanted to get ahead you worked harder.  Now the harder you work and the more money you make the more you are penalized to pay for the people who don't work as hard.  The guy who working 70 hours a week is taxed harder to pay for someone who only thinks he should have to work 40 hours.  If you only want to work 40 hours fine, but you can't get ahead in this world doing that.  I am all for equality in that everyone should have an equal chance to do whatever they want.  We've had that for years.  Look how many immigrants come to this country without a pot to pi ss in and make something of themselves.  This No Child Left Behind mentality of making sure everyone has equality of outcome is a load of crap.  I would rather see the top end of school kids "pushed" than the bottom end "pulled."  Kids need to be taught that in this world no one is going to give it you, if you want something you got to go out and get it.  You just have to want it bad enough.  And if you don't want it bad enough to work for it you don't deserve it.
 

cattlejunky

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
538
Location
indiana
Dusty said:
This is why Obama scares me..  His redistribution of wealth policies are exactly what will be the downfall of this country. 

There really is no nice way to say this, but, welfare, socialized medicine, etc..(wealth distribution, socialism) is essentially subsidizing the procreation and living of people who are too lazy and aren't intelligent enough to take care of themselves.  Now, I'm not saying that they're aren't people out there that need help(mentally handicapped people etc.), but to give a check to someone who is of sound mind and body is just perpetuating the problem of people who don't contribute procreating and having children who won't contribute and so on.  There gets to be a greater % of the population that doesn't have to pay taxes so they elect leaders(Obama) who will essentially give them something for nothing.  After awhile the % of people who are supporting the non-producers will get small enough and the burden heavy enough that they will just say screw it and quit. 

The preceding paragraph is what lies at the heart of why the left is essentially evil.  It's a "happy" evil because we are "helping" people, but it is in an evil none the less and it will be the ultimate downfall of America.  We need to get back to when people were expected to take care of themselves.  Where parents are in charge of raising their own children how they see fit.  When if you wanted to get ahead you worked harder.  Now the harder you work and the more money you make the more you are penalized to pay for the people who don't work as hard.  The guy who working 70 hours a week is taxed harder to pay for someone who only thinks he should have to work 40 hours.  If you only want to work 40 hours fine, but you can't get ahead in this world doing that.  I am all for equality in that everyone should have an equal chance to do whatever they want.  We've had that for years.  Look how many immigrants come to this country without a pot to pi ss in and make something of themselves.  This No Child Left Behind mentality of making sure everyone has equality of outcome is a load of crap.  I would rather see the top end of school kids "pushed" than the bottom end "pulled."  Kids need to be taught that in this world no one is going to give it you, if you want something you got to go out and get it.  You just have to want it bad enough.  And if you don't want it bad enough to work for it you don't deserve it.


(thumbsup) (thumbsup) <party> <party> (clapping) (clapping)EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Do you think we could all pool enough money to get our message out?
 

Simmymom1

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
1,280
Location
Texas
(thumbsup)  Cattlejunky -    Ummm.... I think we are going to need to raise about 4 MILLION dollars very quickly to get our 30 minutes of tv time to get the word out!! If I had the money I would sure do it - time is running out!! 
 

cattlejunky

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
538
Location
indiana
Simmymom1 said:
(thumbsup)   Cattlejunky -    Ummm.... I think we are going to need to raise about 4 MILLION dollars very quickly to get our 30 minutes of tv time to get the word out!! If I had the money I would sure do it - time is running out!! 
I don't have the money either!
 

kanshow

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
2,660
Location
Kansas
Did anyone hear the audio clip they were playing this morning.  It was a woman who had just been to an Obama rally & she was saying something like  "I am so happy, I won't have to work to fill my gas tank or put food on the table.  If I help him (obama) he'll help me"     

DISGUSTING... if you ask me...
 

Dusty

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,097
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQ7LcplfkgY

about 2 mins in Ezra Taft-Benson talks about when he met with Kruschev...  Almost scary to think about what he said 40 years ago and what's happening now...
 

Dusty

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,097
Supporting evidence for my previous post....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=381gFG4Crr8

This is McCain's card to shoot the moon with...  He won't do it though.... For fear of being called rascist...What a crock!!!!!!

We used to kill Communists...Now we're electing them!!!
 

kanshow

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
2,660
Location
Kansas
Oh yea Dusty!!  That's the clip I was talking about.   It makes me sick to my stomach.   

I really do not understand how people think this is actually going to happen.  Have we bred the logic out?  Republicans have Joe the Plumber, the Democrats have Mary the Moron.

Did you read the comments under those videos?   
 
Top