Even George McGovern is Against Anti-Democratic ‘Card Check’ Union Plan
Posted on August 8, 2008
-By Warner Todd Huston
On August 8, George McGovern had an editorial published by the Wall Street Journal that astounds for the fact that it runs counter to union aims.
In it, McGovern warns the unions against their woefully misnamed “Employee Free Choice Act,” the legislation that has as one of its main goals the elimination of democratic styled, secret balloting for union elections. Unions actually wish to eliminate the union member’s ability to keep his vote private. This act will serve to put pressure on union voters to conform to the union’s party line because, after all, every vote they make as individuals will be open for their union bosses to see.
Saying that voting is an “immense privilege,” McGovern worries that the unions are about to destroy that privilege.
That is why I am concerned about a new development that could deny this freedom to many Americans. As a longtime friend of labor unions, I must raise my voice against pending legislation I see as a disturbing and undemocratic overreach not in the interest of either management or labor.
The legislation is called the Employee Free Choice Act, and I am sad to say it runs counter to ideals that were once at the core of the labor movement. Instead of providing a voice for the unheard, EFCA risks silencing those who would speak.
McGovern tells his fellow Democrats that “we cannot be a party that strips working Americans of the right to a secret-ballot election.”
McGovern sums up with the following warning:
I worry that there has been too little discussion about EFCA’s true ramifications, and I think much of the congressional support is based on a desire to give our friends among union leaders what they want. But part of being a good steward of democracy means telling our friends “no” when they press for a course that in the long run may weaken labor and disrupt a tried and trusted method for conducting honest elections.
I have to say that, for once, George McGovern is on the right side of an issue. I welcome his support to stop the card check system being implemented. However, I doubt his voice will be heard by the radical left, sadly.
» Filed Under Communism, Congress, Economy, Elections, Liberal Media/Bias, News, Union Mafias/Thugs
Trackback URL
Comments
4 Responses to “Even George McGovern is Against Anti-Democratic ‘Card Check’ Union Plan”
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Suggestions
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
Seriously, I am SO freakin’ glad someone is starting to shed some light on this issue! I am a Colorado native and have been a pretty much undecided voter- sometimes voting R and sometimes voting D. I used to like Mark Udall, but ever since he has come public with his support of EFCA, I can’t anymore. I am a worker, and cannot believe he thinks it is ok for me to be basically forced into joining a union. I’m shocked. And I WILL NOT be voting for him come November, based solely on this issue.
I have great respect for Senator McGovern. But this time, he is simply wrong.
In an ideal world, a secret ballot election might be an ideal way to determine employees’ choice regarding unionization. In the real world, the union election process has too often become anti-democratic.
Employers’ power over employees and the workplace gives them overwhelming built-in advantages that no incumbent union has in a democratic political election. Employers bombard employees with anti-union propaganda in mandatory meetings, often one-on-one with employees’ own supervisors.
The Employee Free Choice Act would help allow employees to gain the collective voice in the workplace that many say they want and need to bargain for decent wages and working conditions.
Paulo,
No, the inaptly named “Employee Free Choice Act” will do nothing of the kind. It destroys the democratic process and forces union employees to be open to coercion by union thugs to vote the union line. Why? Because any “no” vote would be open for EVERYONE to see and this way the union thugs can target the people voting against the union line. This allows union thugs to see who they need to attack verbally and otherwise to “change their minds” to get a vote the union wants.
THAT is what will result with this legislation. Further union lock on power, employees will lose their freedom to vote the way they want, and our economy will take a hit because of it.
A union election pits an outside union with very little access to employees against employers which vigorously fight to keep unions out. Employers often require employees to sit through numerous mandatory meetings in which the union is criticized, and all to often, employees labeled as a union supporter are fired. The sad truth is that the National Labor Relations Board can do little to stop employers who intimidate workers. At most, employers that break the law only have to put up a sign and pay back wages—a small price to pay in exchange for scaring employees into voting against the union.
Until there are real consequences for employers’ intimidation of employees, the secret ballot union election is flawed. EFCA makes the playing field less tilted towards employers by giving employees more control of their choice of a representative. For over 70 years, a union could become the representative based on a “card check” in which a majority of employees say they want the union . . . but only if the employer agrees. Under EFCA, if a majority of employees say they want union representation—and the NLRB certifies that the cards are valid and weren’t coerced—then the employer must respect the employees’ choice.
The fear of union intimidation is also overplayed. The number of elections involving unions coercion is tiny, especially compared to employers’ use of intimidation. And ask yourself this: who would you rather say no to, some union representative that you may never see again or your employer, who with one stroke of the pen can take away your salary, health insurance, and pension contributions?