Specter Suggests Changes to Union Bill

Source: WSJ

By KRIS MAHER

Sen. Arlen Specter is floating two compromise proposals on a contentious union-organizing bill to gauge the business community's willingness to accept the changes and find a middle ground on the bill, according to people familiar with the discussions.

Business groups were quick to shoot down his proposals, in a sign of how difficult it will be to reach agreement on legislation that makes it easier to organize workers. "We continue to stand in support of the right of workers to have a secret ballot and the right to vote on contracts without interference from government bureaucrats," said Katie Packer, executive director of the Workforce Fairness Institute, a business-backed nonprofit that opposes the Employee Free Choice Act, also known as "card check."

Under a potential compromise on the contentious subject of secret-ballot elections, workers could mail in ballots during union elections instead of the bill's current provision in which workers would sign cards collected by union organizers. The compromise approach would theoretically preserve privacy and reduce opportunities for coercion by union organizers and employers.


Associated Press
Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter has suggested two possible compromises on the Employee Free Choice Act.

The second change would restrict the use of arbitrators in contract negotiations to situations in which the two sides fail to reach agreement on their last and best offer. The current version of the bill calls for automatic arbitration after 120 days.


Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124243752071226041.html

---

I say wait until Franken is seated before talking about changes to EFCA! Full story at link.

My feelings exactly.

Very nice.

:thumbsup:

But at the rate we are being co-opted

It is NOT amazing

Put a real Democrat in the Senate, not another Joe Lieberman!

It's easy to see why corporations are against unions. They want labor as cheap as possible.

But in the South, many workers are also anti-uinion. They believe that they can have a job if there are no unions; if there are unions, then they think they won't have a job.

For example, clothing mills started in New England, then they moved to the South for cheaper labor and all kinds of promises from the politicians (no tax for a period of time, then low tax, below-cost land, etc.)

But Mexico and other countries have even cheaper labor and even less oversight of safety, so the Vanity Fair Mills near my hometown have left. So has the shirt factory (maker of shirts).

About 15 years ago, the workers in a South Carolina plant that makes the fiber for car floor mats voted on whether to join a union. My brother, who worked there, was told that if the workers voted for a union, the plant would move to Mexico. The workers voted not to join the union.

I still hope that this bill that makes it easier for workers to unionize will pass.

I think that if the Southerners are able to have unionized jobs, more workers would stop voting against their own economic interests in national elections.

Union workers are more likely to actually show up and vote than non-union workers, and not be hoodwinked by the likes of Rush Limbaugh. Sure many union men listen to Rush, but at least they are getting the other point of view from their union too.

One way for the UAW to boost its sagging membership rolls would be to have a crack at unionizing the Southern auto workers at BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Nissan.

it was a blank slate and they had a coordinated and well financed ($$ to the pols) effort to "prep the battlefield" coercing the population on the evils of unionization. There are some here (Phillip-Morris N.News Shipyard etc.) but not many. The ones that are here get almost no mention.

Just rename it after him.

The glory of Arlen is and always has been his sole consideration.

I'd like to know the details though.

In a democracy no one should have to vote in full public view. The secret ballot allows people to express their own preference without peer influence or fear of intimidation.

the 120-day arbitration provision should stay.

as far as I can tell. Any union members of DU that would be opposed to that? If so, why?

As far as the arbitration thing goes, I have no opinion. I really don't know enough about unions to know if that is a huge compromise or a small one.

republican politician. Any decent Democrat can beat him easily . Let's go Joe. (Sestak)

general strike, anyone?

That was funny!!!

:rofl: :rofl:

:mad: