George McGovern: My Party Should Respect Secret Union Ballots

[question everything]

The Wall Street Journal

My Party Should Respect Secret Union Ballots
By GEORGE MCGOVERN
August 8, 2008; Page A13

As a congressman, senator and one-time Democratic nominee for the presidency, I've participated in my share of vigorous public debates over issues of great consequence. And the public has been free to accept or reject the decisions I made when they walked into a ballot booth, drew the curtain and cast their vote. I didn't always win, but I always respected the process. Voting is an immense 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.

The key provision of EFCA is a change in the mechanism by which unions are formed and recognized. Instead of a private election with a secret ballot overseen by an impartial federal board, union organizers would simply need to gather signatures from more than 50% of the employees in a workplace or bargaining unit, a system known as "card-check." There are many documented cases where workers have been pressured, harassed, tricked and intimidated into signing cards that have led to mandatory payment of dues. Under EFCA, workers could lose the freedom to express their will in private, the right to make a decision without anyone peering over their shoulder, free from fear of reprisal.

(snip)

To my friends supporting EFCA I say this: We cannot be a party that strips working Americans of the right to a secret-ballot election. We are the party that has always defended the rights of the working class. To fail to ensure the right to vote free of intimidation and coercion from all sides would be a betrayal of what we have always championed... 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.

(snip)


URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121815502467222555.html

[jwirr]

1. So then it is true that some Democrats have been supporting open

voter records?

[happyslug]

2. George McGovern has always had a way to see the Anti-union side on Union issues.

One of the reasons he lost in 1972 was Labor was luke warm for him, he had voted AGAINST an appeal of the Taft-Hartley act just a few years before. People forgave him for it, for when he voted he voted as a Senator from the Dakotas, but it did NOT endear him to Labor.

As to the "Secret Ballot" vote, I would have NO problem with it, except by law, the labor union can be BANNED by the company from Company property and has to present its side outside the Company (or by its recruiters during break times who work for the Company, but not on Company time nor use company assets, including break rooms). At the same time the Company can call in all of its workers, together or individually and tell them why they should NOT vote for the union. Unions have been fighting this difference in power since the 1940s and been losing. Employees sign the petition to join a union, and then face a full court press of Anti-union propaganda to vote against the union, that the Union is unable to counter (do to the problem the Union can be and most often are banned from being on the property of the employer). The union card check off ends that imbalance, if the majority of employees sign the card, the union is formed. No need for a vote if you have more than 50% of the employees sign the check off card. Remember as the Union is getting employees to sign the check off card the employers can send what ever message they want to the employees NOT to join the union or withdraw they already check cards.

My point is simple, employees have to be able to form a union if a Majority of them want one. You do NOT need a Secret Ballot for that if the Majority are willing to sign check cards. Either way you get a Majority of supporters for the Union, without the Union being cut out of any ability to talk to the employees.

More on the Free Choice Act:
http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employee_Free_Choice_Act
http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/employee-free-choice-act/home
http://anti-union.blogspot.com/2008/07/labor-bloggers-to-promote-employee-free.html
http://www.teamster.org/action/political/efca.asp

I would normally put some opposing views on the Act, but the number of such sites exceed the pro sites I think it would be unfair so I will not.

[MidwestTransplant]

3. Maybe I need to be educated on this but I don't see why having a secret

ballot is bad.

[Earth Bound Misfit]

4. Read Dr Gordon Lafer's report

FREE AND FAIR? HOW LABOR LAW FAILS U.S. DEMOCRATIC ELECTION STANDARDS

As the world’s first democracy, the United States has long served as the standard-bearer for defining what constitutes “free and fair” elections. But what exactly are these standards? While there are myriad practices that make up a democratic election — and many practices that vary from one state to another— a handful of core principles define the U.S. tradition of democratic elections. In addition to the secret ballot, these include:

• Genuine competition between parties and equal access to voters
• Free speech for both candidates and voters
• Equal access to the media
• Separation of state and party
• Leveling the playing field by controlling campaign finance
• Protecting voters from economic coercion
• Timely implementation of the voters’ will

Lafer concludes that union representation elections fall alarmingly short of living up to the most fundamental tenets of democracy. The inclusion of a secret ballot does not change the fact that the process as a whole is fundamentally broken and unfair.

Full Report: http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/dmdocuments/ARAWReports/FreeandFair%20FINAL.pdf