EFCA and intimidation (by CEOs)

http://www.post-trib.com/news/blogentries/index.html?bbPostId=Cz6iFaxHocJSxCz78ikWSfvO5tB69Hb6WtUhDcCz2OHkIlcHBTY&bbParentWidgetId=B8j4te2LpaP5zF2wdOIaNTqV

Several links in story at link.

The Modern Left

The Modern Left is a political blog written by people on the political left for people on the political left.
EFCA and intimidation

Saturday, May 09, 2009
Since Arlen Specter's party switch, people have been talking and writing about The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) and wondering what effect, if any, Specter's switch would have on the legislation.

How important is EFCA? To the economy, it could be very important.

The Service Employee International Union (SEIU), comprised of workers in the hospitality industry, estimates that EFCA's passage would be tantamount to a mini economic stimulus package pumping $49 billion a year into the economy.



Some were hoping that with the switch to the Democratic Party, Arlen Specter would give the Democrats enough votes to pass the legislation. But before becoming a Democrat, Arlen Specter was against EFCA. As a Democrat...nothing has changed. His reasoning was the idea that EFCA removes the secret ballot. That, however, is a myth.

Fiction: The "legislation would end the rights of employees to secret ballot elections."
– Center for Union Facts

FACT: The Employee Free Choice Act does not abolish elections or "secret ballots." Under the proposed legislation, workers get to choose the union formation process—elections or majority sign-up. Under current law, the choice to recognize a union rests only with employers.

What the Employee Free Choice Act does prevent is an employer manipulating the flawed system to influence the election outcome. When faced with organizing campaigns: 25 percent of employers illegally fire pro-union workers; 51 percent of employers illegally threaten to close down worksites if the union prevails; and, 34 percent of employers coerce workers into opposing the union with bribes and favoritism.



Some claims that card check will allow unions to intimidate people into joining. Those people claim that elections carried out using the rules from the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) are more fair.

American Rights at Work commissioned a survey which was conducted by Rutgers University and Jesuit Wheeling University professors Adrienne Eaton, Ph.D., and Jill Kriesky, Ph.D. This survey found that there was far more intimidation from management then from unions.

Of all workers surveyed (election and card check combined), four times as many workers reported that management coerced them “a great deal” as opposed to the union (22% vs. 6%)...

...During NLRB elections, 46% of workers complained of management pressure, compared to only 14% of workers during card check campaigns reporting pressure from the union...

...Workers in NLRB elections were 53% more likely than those in card check campaigns to report that management threatened to eliminate jobs, and 28% more likely to report that management discriminated against union supporters...


FULL story at link.