Employee Free Choice Act... Please Help!

[Robbie88]

I have had several arguments with acquaintances who constantly rehash the old propaganda piece claiming that the "Employee Free Choice Act takes away the secret ballot." I know that this is not true, but I would feel much more comfortable if I were able to point to the exact wording within the legislation which provides for the continued allowance of secret ballot elections in order to help make my point more effective. From what I've gathered from my reading of the EFCA, the following section seems to be the primary amendment to the manner in which unions are authorized:

4 SEC. 2. STREAMLINING UNION CERTIFICATION.
5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 9(c) of the National
6 Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 159(c)) is amended by
7 adding at the end the following:
8 ‘‘(6) Notwithstanding any other provision of this sec9
tion, whenever a petition shall have been filed by an em10
ployee or group of employees or any individual or labor
11 organization acting in their behalf alleging that a majority
12 of employees in a unit appropriate for the purposes of col13
lective bargaining wish to be represented by an individual
14 or labor organization for such purposes, the Board shall
15 investigate the petition. If the Board finds that a majority
16 of the employees in a unit appropriate for bargaining has
17 signed valid authorizations designating the individual or
18 labor organization specified in the petition as their bar19
gaining representative and that no other individual or
20 labor organization is currently certified or recognized as
21 the exclusive representative of any of the employees in the
22 unit, the Board shall not direct an election but shall certify
23 the individual or labor organization as the representative
24 described in subsection (a).

So if I am understanding this correctly, the only section relating to union authorization in the original NLRA which is amended by the EFCA is Section 9(c). I have not had the chance to read over the entire NLRA, but it appears that Section 9(c) is not the portion of the original act which deals with with the issue of employees' access to secret ballot elections, so would the above section, along with the original NLRA be what I would cite to back up my arguments? Or is there something more direct that I am somehow missing?

Thanks and I greatly appreciate any help that any of you may be able to offer me!

[readmoreoften]

1. K&R. Welcome to DU and Happy May Day! /nt

[Robbie88]

2. Thank you! Happy May Day to you, also!

n/t

[Tangerine LaBamba]

3. Well, I don't see how that quoted passage........

refers to the concept of ballots, but I'm no labor lawyer.

But, before that, why are you being defensive in these "conversations"?

If someone makes the assertion that "the Employee Free Choice Act makes secret ballots illegal" argument, you should ask them to show you where in the Act they read that.

Make THEM explain and defend their position. Do NOT let them send you scurrying to find something solid to disprove their out-of-thin-air allegations.

First rule of successful debating: Never take on work that's not yours.

The make the allegation, THEY have to prove it.

Put up or shut up.

Yes, it's that simple.

Don't EVER let anyone put you on the defensive with bullshit. Call them on it every time, and watch them disappear................

[Robbie88]

7. Right. My thought was though, that because from what I've been able to tell from reading the EFCA,

the section which I quoted in my OP was the primary section dealing with how unions may be authorized by card-check. Since this section only amends Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, which, from what I've read, does not deal with granting a secret ballot election, I thought that maybe I could use the posted section to prove my point that the EFCA will not eliminate the secret ballot since the one section of the original NLRA, which deals directly with how a union is authorized, being amended is Section 9(c), which does not address the issue of a secret ballot. I think I am struggling a bit with articulating exactly what's on my mind, so I apologize for that.

Your point is taken as far as my defensiveness in these conversations goes. I guess my reasoning though for feeling the need to be on the defensive as far as the EFCA comes from the fact that I'm from a fairly conservative town in which both of the major news papers have a heavy anti-union bias, so I sort of feel like I am fighting an uphill battle at times.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

9. Don't be intimidated .........

Just tell them you want to learn, that they have to show you the provision and explain it to you.

Don't ever take on a responsibility that is not yours, or, as we say in the South, "It ain't my baby, I ain't gonna rock it."

When you operate from a defensive stance, you're also operating from a position of weakness, and you're allowing your opponent to define the argument.

Don't do that. Make them prove what they say.

See what happens, and good luck!

[Robbie88]

18. OK, thank you for the advice! n/t

[dcsmart]

4. maybe this helps

or maybe you have read this already. but here it is
http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/whatis.cfm

[Robbie88]

8. I looked at this page a bit earlier, but I haven't had time to read over most of the material yet,

but since you recommended it I'll definitely take a deeper look at it. Thanks for the help!

[dcsmart]

10. i checked out your blog

i like it. i see you have a post from DSA. r u a member. I am, the Detroit local. you should stop by the Socialist Progressives Group
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=395

take care

[Robbie88]

12. Thank you! I really appreciate that!

I'm not currently a member of DSA, although I definitely am considering joining. From what I've been able to tell, you guys seem to have the most effective strategy of all the socialist groups out there, as far as the way in which you've gone about trying to gain influence within the two-party system.

Take care!

[dcsmart]

13. that's the strategy

i think that is really the only option for now. we support progressive candidates for office. not necessary democrat, but really what choices are there. you are right, there are many socialist groups in this country. some of them field Pres candidates, local and state. The socialist party usa does that and here in michigan they run on the green ticket as socialist-green. they ran for school boards and local positions and i voted for them. i think one of the downfalls of the socialist movement is its separation from one another. I think there needs to be a consolidated effort across the country to field candidates like Bernie Sanders who will run for state and federal positions. the problem is that some of the other organizations see what we do as selling out to the system. here are a few links for you. i have my own site were i post a lot of articles and videos.

take care

http://www.dsausa.org/about/locals.html

http://timetofight.tumblr.com/
my site...

[Robbie88]

14. Yeah, it definitely seems like a lot of the members of the various socialist groups in the U.S.

are more concerned with fighting each other over minor differences in beliefs than they are in actually taking on the "system" so to speak. Plus, it seems like a lot of the people who accuse DSA of selling out are just "arm chair revolutionaries" who don't really seem to have any sort of strategy at all.

Thanks for the links! Your website is very well done and informative, also.

Take care!

[Robbie88]

16. Also, just curious...

What are your thoughts on the International Socialist Organization? They seemed to be pretty active around the campus back when I lived in Madison and they appear to be pretty well organized, but I've also heard that they have kind of heavy-handed leadership.

[dcsmart]

17. i really like their website and the news they provide

i am talking about the Socialist Worker which they maintain along with haymarket books and ISA http://internationalsocialist.org/
i post a lot of articles from their site on DU and on my site. but you are correct in your earlier post " various socialist groups in the U.S. are more concerned with fighting each other over minor differences in beliefs than they are in actually taking on the "system" so to speak." when i read other sites that is exactly what seems to be happening. for example, Socialist Party USA ran pres and vice pres candidates and the Socialist Equality Party did too. WSWS is news site http://www.wsws.org/

so you have all these socialist groups pushing candidates that really agree on the same basic principles instead of consolidating resources and at least trying to run candidates like bernie sanders (member of DSA) for congress, not for president which is a waste of time. anyway, i like the news reporting from the groups above and they are active in front line change, WSWS has a lot of interviews with workers and auto workers in order to support them and gain public support. Also, like DSA many of the groups probably work within other social groups, such as "jobs with justice" and unions and have campaigns for the employee free choice act. That is what DSA does. our members are in a variety of social action groups. i would still like to see socialist movement come together in a more united front. health care would be the fist cause. all of them support some type of single payer health care as DSA does.
anyway, that is the scoop from my brain. action speaks louder than words, but words inspire people to action.....(you can use that..lol..)
lets keep the dialog going.

[Robbie88]

19. Yeah, I've always really liked ISO's Socialist Worker website also, and I just started

reading WSWS not that long ago and that too seems to be a great site.

I think I'm pretty much on the same page as you are as far as with what I think needs to be done within the socialist movement. Each of the groups seems to serve its own individual purpose and it's understandable that they remain separate groups because of ideological differences, but at the same time I agree that there needs to be some sort of cooperation amongst all of the groups to help take on issues that all of us find important.

Anyways, it's been great talking with you, and I agree, we'll definitely have to keep the dialog going.

[mn9driver]

5. What EFCA does:

If more than 50 percent of an employee group signs union authorization cards, the union is in. If 30 percent or more sign the cards, there will be a secret ballot election. Business is scared spitless of this, which is why the money and lies are pouring in to defeat it.

[patrice]

6. This does not specify how the petition that is presented to the board is acquired, publicly or

privately. It just says that if a representative/s of a qualified bargaining unit presents a petition, the Board will look at it and see whether the signatures represent a majority of the unit and if they do the Board cannot call for an election, but shall go ahead and certify the union representative/s.

I don't understand whether the petition is the same thing as a card check or something that comes after one or more card checks as a result of seeing high enough numbers in the card check/s to justify running a petition . . . ?

[Omaha Steve]

11. Rachel Maddow Explains the Employee Free Choice Act

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50H3II6MxbQ&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffreechoice.seiu.org%2Fpage%2Fs%2Ffreechoice2%3Fsource%3Dadwords%26subsource%3Dmaddow%26gclid%3DCI7Mnqufm5oCFRYpFQodqwPr9Q&feature=player_embedded

[Robbie88]

15. Cool, thanks for the link! n/t