Quick Thought on EFCA
January 7th, 2009 | by Craig |So, if the codified union thuggery, known as the Employee Free Choice Act [ . . . ]
Pardon the interruption, but I’d be hard pressed to find another bill that is any more misnamed than this one. From now on, I’m going to refer to it as the Slavery Is Choice Act.
[ . . . ] actually passes, and you, as an employee are no longer entitled to the fundamental democratic right of a secret ballot, I wonder:
How does this square with the state constitution which has a defined Right of Privacy?
Section 10. Right of privacy. The right of individual privacy is essential to the well-being of a free society and shall not be infringed without the showing of a compelling state interest. (Emphasis mine. OK, it’s the whole thing, but that’s some pretty clear language right there, if you ask me. –Ed.)
Seems like EFCA and the Montana Constitution are pretty much incompatible.
I’ll bet that the Montana (or PA) sinestra suddenly loses interest in the Montana Constitution. What say you?
11 Responses to “Quick Thought on EFCA”
By Mark T on Jan 8, 2009 | Reply
Again, you’re not getting it. If employees want a secret ballot, they get a secret ballot. Can you hang on to that fact and not repeat the talking point menu again?
The thing that changes is this: If a majority of employees want to form a union, they get to do so without delay. As things stand right now, it’s hard if not impossible to do so.
By Craig on Jan 8, 2009 | Reply
No, I get it just fine. Ignorance is strength. War is peace. Doubleplusungood. Gotcha.
If you honestly think that the unions won’t abuse this power once they get it, then you’re not as an astute observer of human nature as you think you are.
By Matt Singer on Jan 8, 2009 | Reply
Currently, employers get to determine whether employees use majority sign-up or an NLRB election process. Under the Free Choice Act, employees make that decision.
Why do employers get to decide whether and how employees organize themselves?
By JP on Jan 8, 2009 | Reply
I’ll admit that I don’t get it, Mark.
Let’s say this passes, and the majority wants to form a union through majority sign-up but one single person wants his/hers to be secret ballot.
Under Section 10 of Montana’s Constitution – wouldn’t he/she be guaranteed that right regardless of the majority, and therefore make this legislation possibly unconstitutional in Montana?
Clearly if everyone was on board for majority sign-up, then it’s moot; but in the not impossible circumstance I suggest, wouldn’t the Constitution trump the majority in this instance?
By Steve on Jan 8, 2009 | Reply
This is Employee Choice? To have the privilege of the equivalent of telemarketers in person harassing you until you cave in and sign the card, all the while thinking it is calling for a secret ballot? The worst part of this is not that they are trying to help workers – they’re not – it’s to increase union dues so that they can spend even more than the $400 million they spent last year electing Democrats.
By Mark T on Jan 8, 2009 | Reply
JP – I don’t know the answer to your question – it’s a matter for litigation for sure. I’m personally not sure that constitutional guarantees to secret ballots apply to all elections in public and private bodies, but I certainly stand to be educated.
Honestly, Craig and Steve, can you be any dumber? It’s downright Coobsian.
By Craig on Jan 8, 2009 | Reply
That’s the best you got?
You can do better, can’t you? How about something like, “You guys are about as sharp as a bag of wet leather.” That’s pretty nifty, and somewhat original.
Since I’m dumb, maybe you can enlighten me as to why I’m dumb.
Am I dumb because I think that unions will use this to strong-arm membership? Am I dumb because I think that the secret ballot should be sacrosanct in any setting?
Since you know everything, I await your instruction, O Wise Swami.
By Steve on Jan 8, 2009 | Reply
That’s just his fall back answer to all issues that he can’t adequately address. For Mark – Just remember those magic words “What would Noam do?”
By Dave Dingee on Jan 9, 2009 | Reply
Mark T’s comment that if employees want a secret ballot they get it is not true. It is a union talking point that is misleading. Under EFCA the only time that employees get a secret ballot is if the union organizing can’t get more than 50% of the employees to sign his petition or cards. Once a majority sign, the union comes in instantly and no secret ballot vote takes place. The union organizer makes this decision. The employees do not.
By Dave Budge on Jan 9, 2009 | Reply
Dave is right. If the union can bully 50.000001% of the employees to sign cards they can take it to the NLRB for certification under EFCA. Simple as that.
Under current law, if 30% of employees sign cards then the union can take it to the NRLB and cause an election.
But even if 90% of employees think that there shouldn’t be a secret ballot does that give them the “right” to force the minority into making a public statement – either by commission or omission – about their desires to enter into collective bargaining. Where’s all the talk about protecting the minority by supporters of this tripe?
By Mark T on Jan 11, 2009 | Reply
Sorry for the pejorative. My bad.
The nexus here seems to be that the labor organizers will “bully” workers – that’s an old On The Waterfront stereotype that I see still has traction. In fact, labor organizers have to persuade workers to vote for a union.
Employees for try to take a leadership position in forming unions are routinely fired, and NLRB is of no use except to force back pay for that single employee some yeaers later, after the threat of unionization has passed. In the meantime, employees get the message – don’t go there.
EFCA restores some semblance of balance by removing the incentive for the employer to fire the mischievous employee. Have an election, it’s a done deal.
That is why the opposition. Employees might finally have an effective tool in forming unions.
Unions have been in decline because of many factors – they haven’t been needed, business propaganda, and bullying tactics to prevent their formation. EFCA won’t pass this time – things will have to get worse. Right now, too many Democrats are poseurs. But it will pass, in time.