The inside skinny I got on this measure was that the proponents knew it would never pass, but pushed forward anyway because they wanted to get the Republicans on the record against the measure. It'll probably come back once or twice more before the 2008 election.

If the Senate had held their cloture vote on card-checks, the AFL-CIO wouldn't know who to target.

Someone should have moved for a secret ballot!

I don't know a whole heckuvalot about this, but at face value, common sense tells me that voting in front of a union organizer indicating whether you want them is an intimidation technique.

Another problem is that unions give considerably to campaigns for politicians that may not be to the liking of their members. My father belonged to a union, but was constantly at odds with many of the other views the politicians held that his union contributed to. It irked him to no end that they became advocates for a whole host of things that had nothing to do with work related issues; public policy, pension funds, etc.

Lee is trying to make this mess look good for democrats. I am sure republicans in the next election cycle, will run adds touting how Reid and the other democrats tried to pass a law that would make it illegal to have confidential votes. Dream on Lee the Liar Tsar, but this is another one in the dimmer category. ww

Actually, WeeWillie, Wavemaker (in one of his rare moments of lucidness) got it right.

If the Senate had held their cloture vote on card-checks, the AFL-CIO wouldn't know who to target.

Right. Those Senators who went on the record against this measure are now targets for the unions. There will probably one or two more votes before the next election which will give these Republicans a chance to 'redeem themselves' before it really gets nasty.

I don't support the unions in this effort, as I think this a pretty greasy way to handle union organizing, but that the news folks. I don't make the news I just link to it...

Ah, Lee, cynical and intimidating. Meet the new Boss. The herd is only going to hear the bellowing about obstructionist Republicans blocking the free choice of the working man.
===================================

The inside skinny I got on this measure was that the proponents knew it would never pass, but pushed forward anyway because they wanted to get the Republicans on the record against the measure. It'll probably come back once or twice more before the 2008 election.

"Republicans Oppose Removal of Secret Ballot".

Feel free to run on that issue, Lee.
-=Mike

Imagine waking up to find that Hillary was the new president because the Democrats had accumulated enough "cards" to prove that she had the support of 51% of the American public. Imagine that you had not even been contacted and were not aware that an election had taken place.

I have nothing against collective bargaining but unions are not about power to the worker, they are about despotic power to a different select group.

There are better ways to get justice for workers than two chefs in the kitchen.
=========================

"The herd is only going to hear the bellowing about obstructionist Republicans blocking the free choice of the working man."

Right. All we're talking about here is the right to vote - there is nothing saying HOW they'd vote -- they could vote for the union, or against it -- but who in America -- come on now, sing it with me kim -- WHO in America is against the right to vote?

Republicans. We now have a list.

Lee Ward: "Right. All we're talking about here is the right to vote.."

Every now again, the lies of the left, as evidenced above, are so breathtaking that you almost have to wonder if the idiot spouting them is really a Rovian plant to undermine the other side.

Lee, please be so kind as to provide links that demonstrate that, due to Republican opposition, votes for unionizing workforces has been repealed.

Don't worry, we know that what you are really about is the abolition of the secret ballot, exactly as it has been done with every communist government in the world.

Nuff said.

Good old Lee. He wants all the same "rights" that they have in Communist China or Cuba.

Thanks Lee!!........but no thanks.

Did Lee really say that or am I misunderstanding? You know that a secret ballot was preserved by the actions of those Republicans, don't you? Did you miss the point, or are you really as cynical as you seem?
==========================

Ward, your ignorance is showing, again. Your insistance on being stupid is disgusting. Go back to your sandbox. It is funny how the fact 80% of those polled were against this measure. And who but those freedom loving lefties would think it was better to let Unions intimidate people into jointing, Walmart anyone, rather than allow workers to decide by secret ballot, which ils tradition in this country.

Kim, like all good little lefties, Lee has been told what the "truth" is by his little lefty masters, and no amount of factual rebuttal will win out with him.

Lee probably actually believes that votes by unions to determine if workforces will organize have been repealed.

He's that stupid.

What a relief, Drago, I much prefer stupid cows to cynical ones.
=======================================

So you guys missed the point again - no surprise there.

Union organizing faces huge uphill battles to get representative elections. This measure would make simplify the matter with public, mandatory card checks. Organizing elections would be a much more common occurrence under this program.

Do you guys always need your news pre-digested, then fed to you with a small spoon? You guys never read the linked articles do you? And you have no prior knowledge of this issue before reading this post?

From the article Kevin linked: "The Employee Free Choice Act (S.1041), would have leveled the playing field in the workplace by allowing workers to decide to join a union without employer interference [snip]". The interference they are referring to is the current, onerous election process.

Instead of jumping through huge hoops to get a ratification election, a process which can take years, mandatory postcard voting (as facilitated by this bill) would simplify things greatly, and make the election process much easier and more common.

You guys really ought to read a newspaper once in a while...

Were the words too big?

I would jump through hoops for a secret ballot; I'm sure our mutual ancestors died for it. What is the matter with you, Lee?
=================================

Lee, let me spell it out for you:

The cards are not to FACILITATE an election. They are to REPLACE the secret ballot.

Translation: "We don't need no vote. Guido and Nunzio had a little chat wit da workers, and here are all da cards we need to bring in da union."

Lee has become so reactionary -- "if enough of the right-wingers say one thing, it's gotta be a LIE!!!!!!!!!" -- that he's lost whatever ability he ever had to think on his own.

J.

The phrase 'mutual ancestors' is probably an error. My meaning is that we both have ancestors who have died for secret ballots and the like.
=====================================

So maybe you are cynical instead of stupid. The Stalinist name 'Employee Free Choice Act' should be a giveaway.

Why do you think cleverness like this endears you to the electorate? They are a herd, but not of cows.
========================

Our ancestors died for it - how patriotic you are, kim.

The Republicans want to keep the current system that delays or totally prevents union elections. Witness Wal-Mart. How many elections have they had in the years that they've been battling the unions.

This measure would bring elections to businesses where there aren't elections now, kim - so you're heart-tugging flag-waving "secret ballot" meme is nothing more than the usual right wing bullshit.,

Here we have Republicans working to prevent elections - and you couch it a a patriotic measure. How droll...

Here you have the right to secret ballots being preserved and you couch it as repressing elections. That is not droll; it is insidious, and evil.
==========================

Insidious and evil don't sound very bovine, Lee; are you sure you want to stampede on this alarm?
============================

I'm curious to see the 51-48 breakdown. Was it all Republicans against all Democrats, or nearly?
===========================

Lee the idiot: "Union organizing faces huge uphill battles to get representative elections. This measure would make simplify the matter with public, mandatory card checks. Organizing elections would be a much more common occurrence under this program."

Let me see if I can sum this up more succinctly.

Lee, You. Are. Lying.

This bill would have NO impact on HOW MANY elections are held.

They would simply allow the union reps to stand right in front of voter and watch as they "choose" to vote for unionization or not.

Simply put, Lee is advocating the very tactic that perfectly symbolizes every communist totalitarian country in the world.

What a surprise that Lee would support that. Actually, it's not a surprise at all.

AS a former union member (UFCW and UAW), shop steward and organizer, let me say this: You are more full of shit that usual, Lee.
This bill would allow folks in the union to know who voted (or didn't) and HOW they voted. For places that are not unionized but their employees are given the choice, this means that the unions now know who to pressure.
For the shops that already have a union work force, this is still a bad thing. The union leaders would now know who supported or opposed their pet projects. Like who voted against spending union dues on political campaigns. Or who voted for or against raising the dues or changing the internal rules. Would you trust all of these folks to not take advantage of this knowledge?
There is a reason why the founding fathers of this country wanted a secret ballot. Why don't the unions and certain congress critters in Washington?

SCSIwuzzy: "There is a reason why the founding fathers of this country wanted a secret ballot. Why don't the unions and certain congress critters in Washington?"

Because, like Lee, they are Stalinists.

Lee at 5:19 you said:

"I don't support the unions in this effort, as I think this a pretty greasy way to handle union organizing, but that the news folks. I don't make the news I just link to it..."

So you are against the bill.

Then at 5:38 you say:

"Right. All we're talking about here is the right to vote - there is nothing saying HOW they'd vote -- they could vote for the union, or against it -- but who in America -- come on now, sing it with me kim -- WHO in America is against the right to vote?
Republicans. We now have a list."

Now it sounds like you are for it.

Then at 6:38 you post a bunch more stuff that I won't copy and paste that also sounds like you support the bill.

Which is it? It seems to me that Jay Tea has you pegged. If the right is against it then you are for it and vice versa. No wonder you have found a home at Wizbang Porno - I mean Blue.

You guys know a tiny bit about an issue, and when someone comes along and speaks of an area in which you are ignorant you call them a liar. Tsk tsk, little putzes.

afl-cio:

Recent research has shown that some 60 million U.S. workers would join a union if they could.

But the current system for forming unions and bargaining is broken. Every day, corporations deny workers the freedom to decide for themselves whether to form unions to bargain for a better life. They routinely intimidate, harass, coerce and even fire workers who try to form unions and bargain for economic well-being.

The Employee Free Choice Act (H.R. 800, S. 1041), supported by a bipartisan coalition in Congress, would level the playing field for workers and employers and help rebuild America's middle class. It would restore workers' freedom to choose a union by:

*Establishing stronger penalties for violation of employee rights when workers seek to form a union and during first-contract negotiations.

*Providing mediation and arbitration for first-contract disputes.
Allowing employees to form unions by signing cards authorizing union representation.

*Allowing employees to form unions by signing cards authorizing union representation.

And SCSIWuzzy, if you're a former union shop steward it's no wonder they kicked you out. You're a liar.

As to secret ballots, I agree that they are better system. That's the principal reason behind me saying that I disagreed with this tactic of the unions (see my 5:19 comment).

But the facts are the facts, and you trolls can throw all of the stones you want -- the simple matter is that this measure would have greatly facilitated the holding of organizing elections, and those Republicans who opposed it will now be targeted by the unions as opposing the right to organize and hold (timely) elections.

And as I said, all you have to do is look at Wal-Mart to see how the current system hold back the right to organize. It takes years to organize an election, and this system would change that.

Secret ballot - we can agree on that -- but quit your lying Republican ways, you trolls.

Union organizing faces huge uphill battles to get representative elections. This measure would make simplify the matter with public, mandatory card checks. Organizing elections would be a much more common occurrence under this program.

Would you support that for, say, voting for public officials?

From the article Kevin linked: "The Employee Free Choice Act (S.1041), would have leveled the playing field in the workplace by allowing workers to decide to join a union without employer interference [snip]". The interference they are referring to is the current, onerous election process.

THe intimidation is done on the part of the unions, not by management.

The Republicans want to keep the current system that delays or totally prevents union elections. Witness Wal-Mart. How many elections have they had in the years that they've been battling the unions.

Why is it that unions lose more certification elections than they win? Couldn't be that people DON'T WANT TO BE UNIONIZED, could it?

But, heck, you certainly know better what people want than those lowly peons do.

And citing an AFL-CIO study saying people would join a union if they could? Wow, I'm sure that is some REALLY impartial studies being done there.

Lee, you've already shown you're a terrible writer on Blue. You've demonstrated this week that you are completely clueless. Shooting for being a liar now?
-=Mike

Lee: "Secret ballot - we can agree on that -- but quit your lying Republican ways, you trolls."

Thanks for your continued obfuscation and lying Comrade.

Destruction of the secret ballot renders all null and void, as all good little stalinists know.

Which is why the union leadership demanded it.

Which is why all communist countries use non-secret balloting.

Which is why Lee supports it.

Sen Kennedy (link): (emphasis added for the lying idiots)

Loopholes Inviting Abuse

The procedures that workers can use to organize and obtain union representation have large loopholes that invite abuse by employers. When workers attempt to form a union, employers often respond with tactics of intimidation, harassment and retaliation. Employees who join the fight for workers' rights are fired. When workers win the right to organize, employers resort to delay in entering into a contract for months or even years after the union is certified.

Current law prohibits some of these abuses, but employers have no incentive to change their behavior. When employers are penalized for illegal acts, the remedies for workers come far too late--and the penalties are a slap on the wrist. It can be years before a union supporter who is fired receives back pay or reinstatement from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which means that recourse to the Board is an empty threat. Litigation challenging unfair labor practices or improper conduct during a union election can remain pending before the Board for years. At the beginning of last year, 347 unfair labor practice cases had been pending before the Board for more than 17 months. By the end of the year, it had closed only about a third of these cases. Recourse to the NLRB is frequently too little, too late.

We need stronger protections that enable employees to organize freely and negotiate fairly. We also need stronger and stiffer penalties for employers who refuse to play by the rules.

Free Choice

That's why I have introduced the Employee Free Choice Act now pending in Congress. This important law protects the right of workers to form a union; requires employers to come to the table to negotiate a contract; authorizes court orders to stop employers from firing or threatening union advocates; and strengthens the penalties in current law for mistreatment of workers who support a union.

Under the bill, employees will be able to choose between two options for gaining union recognition--a card check or the NLRB electionprocess. Since anti-union conduct is so rampant in union election campaigns, the elections become coercive and hostile, rather than free and fair. Under current law, workers can try to avoid such elections by asking the employer to recognize their union based on a signed worker authorization--a card check; but employers often refuse to accept a card-check procedure. Even if all employees sign cards supporting union representation, the employer can still require an election. The bill preserves the rights of union members by requiring employers to bargain with a union authorized by a majority of workers through the card-check procedure.

As a result, workers' chances of freely exercising their right to freedom of association increase dramatically. In fact, the card-check procedure is good for both employers and unions, since it promotes healthy relationships between employers and employees. Eliminating contentious elections from the certification process produces a better long-term relationship between union and employer.

What - I - said.

Let me know if there are any words you don't understand.

Lee,
So the definition of liar in your world is "anyone that does not agree with Lee" Interesting. Explains much of your "commentary".
I switched careers, like many people do. From working in retail (shop steward), to manufacturing, to IT. Upward mobility, one of the greatest features of the American experience.
I've been in good union locals, and I've been in bad.
Also, quoting the AFL-CIO? No bias or agenda there on their part. Rather like asking NAMBLA about age of consent legislation...

Yes Lee, we are all familiar with how Teddy Kennedy "characterizes" this bill.

However, destruction of the secret ballot is what the point of this bill was.

Yep, for Lee and his pals, it's important to disregard the single most important requirement of a truly free election (put in place by our founding fathers) in order to implement what every totalitarian thug regime requires in its "elections".