Card Check Officially Dies
| Fri Jul. 17, 2009 10:42 AM PDT
This shouldn't come as any surprise at this point, but Democrats have decided to drop card check from the Employee Free Choice Act. It never had unanimous support within the Democratic caucus and Republicans were sure to filibuster it, so it had no chance of passing.
But without card check, what's left? Nathan Newman says "quite a lot":
Let's rename the bill, the "Prevention of Illegal Firings Act" (PIFA) and it's still important labor law reform....Majority signup provisions would be dropped, but elections would be held within five days, employees could not be forced into mandatory meetings, and unions could campaign on company property during the election period.
....This is worlds away from the present situation where elections take well over a month at minimum and often far longer, while mandatory meetings and firings destroy union support and any penalties come in months and even years later for employer actions — and the costs to the employer from those penalties are so minimal that they act as no deterrence.
If anyone wants a frame for this new labor law, it's simple — cracking down on illegal corporate behavior during union elections. The bill becomes a "tough on crime" bill, pure and simple. It's not everything labor wants and it's a dramatic compromise to placate conservative Democrats, but it would be a major improvement for workers rights if it passed in this form.
Centrist Dems have gotten what they wanted. So will they support the bill now? Stay tuned.
Continues Below
Continued From Above
Comments
EFCA
Submitted by john sherman (not verified) on Fri Jul. 17, 2009 11:46 AM PDT.
I understand the bill also has binding arbitration which is much more important.
I was called a Republican
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri Jul. 17, 2009 12:01 PM PDT.
I was called a Republican fascist concern troll six months ago when I said at this blog that card check should be tossed out as political suicide (yes, let's let the Democratic Party become the Party against secret ballots) and instead we should work towards making sure the election cycle was quicker and reform other problems with the NLRB.
And George McGovern? Yeah, all us good progressive liberals wasted no time saying he was a bought and paid for shill, and general no good asshole Republican in drag, and just senile and should just go off and die.
And so what did we get? Months and months of free press for the Republicans about how Democrats wanted to do away with a secret ballot.
Kevin, your brain was a terrible thing to waste.
a little more drama, please
Submitted by junebug on Sat Jul. 18, 2009 11:34 AM PDT.
You're just the despised prophet among us, aren't you? People must call you & McGovern all sorts of bad names because they fear your Wonder Twin insights when it comes to *true* liberalism. Oh. Wait a minute. They never said any of those things about either one of you. They simply had the temerity to point out that, contrary to your claims, the passage of card check left the secret ballot perfectly intact when it comes time to vote on organizing in the workplace. But it's cute that you now see fit to talk about the "months and months of free press for the Republicans about how Democrats wanted to do away with a secret ballot" when you were the one who kept spilling ink to perpetuate that falsehood. A little less Joan of Arc, and a little more intellectual honesty goes a long way.
No Junebug, they called
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat Jul. 18, 2009 3:57 PM PDT.
No Junebug, they called McGovern those things and me those things because they just like to shut people down.
It's not like we don't have the experience of seeing how so called progressives treated Hillary Clinton and her supporters to know that your theory about so called progressives is nonsense.
And once more, it's nonsensical to say card check left the secret ballot intact. Would you say that the symmetrical law that let the board of directors of a company choose whether to pay the minimum wage left the minimum wage intact? Of course not.
way to frame the issue
Submitted by junebug on Sat Jul. 18, 2009 4:45 PM PDT.
Distortions like that are worthy of the Chamber of Commerce. The fact of the matter is that the secret ballot is alive & well in the Canadian workplace, where card check has been in effect for years. When workers can pull off a secret ballot without interference from management, they opt for that. When that's not feasible, they have card check. But never mind that. You'd have everyone believe that the goal of those who support EFCA is to isolate & then silence the likes of you. If they happen to get a reasonable shot at organizing in the workplace without having to endure retribution from management, well, that's okay, too. It's the same old song & dance with you. Feminist bloggers? They've got it in for you. Same with divorce lawyers & anyone who chose Edwards or Obama over Clinton. They're faux liberals just looking for a way to shout you down. And now organized labor is getting in on the conspiracy to silence you. Anyone with an idea contrary to yours simply doesn't understand true liberal principles. Rinse & repeat. Don't you ever get tired of the same old shtick?
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat Jul. 18, 2009 10:31 PM PDT.
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2008104107/george-mcgovern-continues...
"George McGovern Continues to Sell Out Labor
By Rick Perlstein ....
"
Sorry Junebug, I'm not the person eager to anyone who dissents into the faux dem pile. I don't know if you're ignorant or disingenuous, but there were lots and lots of people decrying old fool and sellout McGovern and very busy trying to make the claim that anyone who thought card check was stupid wasn't really a Democrat or liberal. And clearly, that's just what you're doing here now.
try again... and more drama, please!
Submitted by junebug on Sun Jul. 19, 2009 1:28 PM PDT.
"And George McGovern? Yeah, all us good progressive liberals wasted no time saying he was a bought and paid for shill, and general no good asshole Republican in drag, and just senile and should just go off and die." -- the not so anonymous jerry, 7/17/09
And the unforgivable slander against McGovern in the handy link you provide? (Thanks for that!) A title that reads, "George McGovern Continues to Sell Out Labor." The entire column reads straight, citing facts about who supported EFCA & who didn't, and explaining why the bill matters for workers & their families. No name-calling, no strawmen. Just a title that claims McGovern has sold out labor. So has he? Let's look at that, shall we? Considering that the organization which paid for the advertisement in which he speaks is run by a National Restaurant Association lobbyist who had previously headed up an organization called The Center for Union Facts Action Committee, and was affiliated with the Center for Union Facts, a 501(c)(3) devoted to arguing that union officials are corrupt and bad for workers, you can't help but judge McGovern by the company he keeps. It's perfectly fair to say that McGovern has thrown labor under the bus. It's an eminently supportable claim. What about those other nasty things you claim people said about him? The best you can do is point to a link that contradicts your case. Nice work. Anyway, if this is your idea of putting liberal principles into action, then, frankly, we'd all be better off without it.
Those union lobbyists much
Submitted by MacGruber on Fri Jul. 17, 2009 12:55 PM PDT.
Those union lobbyists much be infuriated that their millions of dollars went to waste. However, if the union lobbyists and democrats get their way, even little Molly selling lemonade on the corner will have to accept it when her little brothers, who help make signs and stir the juice, unionize.
little Molly?
Submitted by thersites on Fri Jul. 17, 2009 1:26 PM PDT.
If little Molly keeps her brothers in the basement squeezing lemons all summer, and doesn't pay them squat, then yes, she'll have to accept it if they unionize. If she doesn't want them to unionize she can pay them a decent wage, and let them out of the basement at lunchtime.
Isn't freedom of association right there in the Constitution?
Why do you hate America?
Cardcheck was a strategic mistake...
Submitted by ericf on Fri Jul. 17, 2009 1:38 PM PDT.
...and oddly enough, I mean for both sides. Labor let big business frame EFCA as just a cardcheck bill, and they mostly haven't told people what else is in the bill, or about how strongly labor law supports management. However, by making EFCA just about cardcheck, the anti-union side has offered cover to anyone who votes for it, because they can say they opposed cardcheck.
Like john sherman said, mandatory arbitration is at least as important, and I'll argue more important. Arguably even the provisions strengthening penalties for violating the law and evening up the rules for elections are more important than cardcheck.
In fact, if someone one the side of the angels wanted to lead the business lobbies to focus wholly on cardcheck and miss the rest of the bill, then the strategy was brilliant.
http://www.ravensblog.net
"Why do you hate
Submitted by MacGruber on Fri Jul. 17, 2009 4:08 PM PDT.
"Why do you hate America?"
Last refuge for the clueless. Since when does not allowing a union mean the business treats its employees like wage slaves?
You know we have labor laws and minimum wage requirements, as well as this great thing called "get another job if yours sucks." The government doesn't stop you from changing jobs.
No, this was all about the Democrats trying to get more and more workers - and their mandatory dues - into unions. The unions then take the dues and funnel it back to their Democratic buddies. I wonder how much accountability the union leaders are under?
where we'd be if business had its way
Submitted by junebug on Sat Jul. 18, 2009 10:03 AM PDT.
"You know we have labor laws and minimum wage requirements..."
The labor laws & minimum wage to which you refer were fought tooth & nail at every step of the way by big business & their minions. Their inability to overturn those fundamental pieces of legislation can in no way be understood to mean that they welcomed them. If management had had its way, sweatshop conditions would be the norm in the American workplace: children would still be sent to work; there would be no limit to the number of hours workers were required to be at the job site; there would be no such thing as overtime pay; there would be no standards for workplace safety; there would be no such thing as collective bargaining. None of the advancements in workers' rights came about because management decided workers deserved a break, or even that it was good for their business. These things that we've come to take for granted had to be shoved down the collective throat of business, which fought against them at every step of the way, and which continues to water down existing labor law to the point where it's a mere wisp of what it once was.
card check?
Submitted by Mark Eichenlaub on Sat Jul. 18, 2009 10:06 AM PDT.
Kevin, for those of us not very familiar with card check can you please explain it.
Saddam Hussein both supported and countered Islamic terrorism. Details at...
http://regimeofterror.com
Thank God there are
Submitted by urban legend on Sat Jul. 18, 2009 10:30 AM PDT.
Thank God there are responsible Democrats willing to stand up to those powerful union bosses who can make workers sign a card asking for collective bargaining. Workers must be protected from the people who will try get better terms and conditions of employment for them.
It's funny how so-called libertarians who supposedly care about freedom hate unions so much. What is their answer? Allowing management to use the Pinkertons and local police to use violence to deny their freedom of association? Maybe we should go back to those good old days, recognizing, of course, that people who want to unionize will respond with whatever is necessary to protect themselves.
Wait a second. That's what we had before, and that's why we put a few rules in place. It's called "labor peace." More evidence why American libertarians, so-called, are the stupidest people in the world.
