Tuesday, March 31, 2009

From the "Stunning Admissions" Department

Much has been made regarding a recent Wall street Journal article in which a simple sentence was literally cut in half in an attempt to create a major "A-HAA" moment, with the Journal supposedly admitting that card-check did not eliminate the secret-ballot after all.

After watching the pro-union blogosphere seize this moment, I was hoping against hope that they would report on this stunning admission, taking directly from a union sponsored blog, which finally offered up the truth, albeit wrapped in a blanket of deceit. Instead of offering a few carefully selected words, here's the whole paragraph:

"Under the Employee Free Choice Act any union who receives majority support of those workers seeking to be represented by that particular union, will still have the right to file an election with the NLRB to conduct a secret ballot election if it so chooses. However I would agree this would be unlikely if a union does receive a majority support for a number of reasons."


It goes on to offer;
...why would any union take a chance conducting an election with the possibility of losing such an election..."
I won't hold my breath waiting to see this quote on Keith or Rachel's show.

Friday, March 27, 2009

Why George (and Unions) Can't Read

In case you missed it, this week unions made the comical move (led by Representative George Miller who put this idiotic claim up on his House Committee website) of taking a phrase out of a Wall Street Journal article out of context and then claiming (in exact opposition to the sentence they quoted out of context) that the Wall Street Journal said that EFCA didn't effectively eliminate the secret ballot election. Read the Wall Street Journal's response - it's pretty good.

Miller and the usual suspects (American Rights At Work, the SEIU, AFL-CIO, etc.) went after this sentence: "The bill doesn't remove the secret-ballot option from the National Labor Relations Act but in practice makes it a dead letter" and then left out the "but in practice makes it a dead letter" half of the sentence (kind of an important part of the sentence). I know that union leaders think they're a lot smarter than the rest of us (especially their own members), but give me a break.

Yet if Miller and the unions can't read a simple declarative sentence like the one from the WSJ editorial I guess it's no surprise that they can't read the text of the actual Resolution, which clearly states that EFCA eliminates the secret ballot election in any case where a union shows it has majority support - which today, and certainly after EFCA, is virtually (if not exactly) 100% of the cases.

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Specter Opposes EFCA - Why Now Would be a Bad Time to Relax

Arlen Specter announced today that he would vote against cloture and - sort of goes without saying - is opposed to the Employee Free Choice Act. Even though I am home fighting the flu I can still hear the cheers from here. You can watch his speech here.

Specter says it is the most heavily lobbied issue he can recall in his Senate career. He also mentions his law review article (we've written about that before here - now would be a very good time to read it if you haven't already, and if you have read it before now would be a good time to read it again).

Specter states in his speech that he supports the idea of arbitration of contracts with "baseball arbitration" - i.e. limiting the arbitrator to awarding either one or another final offer. Specter refers to his law review article a couple of times and suggests that instead of EFCA he supports other amendments to the NLRA. So hold onto your hats - this thing is far from over.

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Specter The Tipping Point on EFCA?

Another confirmation of Specter's willingness to move along with the Dems on the Employee Free Choice Act. Even though several Democrat Senators have been making noise like they may shy away from the card check bill, when it comes down to fish or cut bait, politics will rule, the Dems will most likely toe the line, and Specter should be enough to send it over the edge.

Come on 2010!

(meanwhile - brace yourselves...)

Another SEIU Tweet - CNA-NNOC and SEIU Announce National Agreement to Organize Health Care Workers

A huge story in healthcare (once again tipped by Twitter). SEIU and CNA-NNOC (or whatever they're called today) have announced an organizing partnership. Here's the Tweet:

SEIU_AndySternSEIU_AndySternSEIU and CNA-NNOC nurse union make agreement to organize health care workers nationally. Solid organizing partnership and great opportunity

If you haven't been following this story, these two unions have been in a fight - no, a REAL fight complete with riots - for the last couple of years. Both are great at organizing and the infighting between the two has probably been one of the best arguments against both unions since the battle began. Very important development for health Care employers.

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Double the Social Security Mess?!

Unbelievable! At a time when any discussion about the government-run retirement system (Social Security) centers around the failure of the government to handle the money properly, the SEIU (Service Employees Union International) wants the government to take over the private pension system! What is it about history that liberals, and Big Labor, can't read? We already have an administration hanging huge milestones of excessive government overspending, never before matched in history, around the necks of our children and grandchildren.

The administration is now trying to tell American businesses how they can or can't pay their employees. Via the Employee Free Choice Act, they want to take over writing the labor agreements for every business in America, from large to small. And now we're being asked to give the government our pension monies?

American businesses have to be running scared. They are dead center in the sights of the most anti-business, anti-capitalism administration I have seen, outside of the confines of pure communism. The administration was partly brought to the table by Big Labor, and seems to be doing everything it can to allow Big Labor to rule the playground of American enterprise. The Big Labor - Socialist Administration is a match made in ...

Monday, March 16, 2009

Are You On Twitter? One More Reason You Should Be

Social networking sites are being used more and more for organizing activity. If you aren't at least following what is going on on these web 2.0 spaces (Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, LinkedIn, etc.) you are missing a lot. One person you might want to follow? Andy Stern, who had this little "tweet" this morning...

SEIU_AndySternSEIU AndyStern In Atlantic City to form new Gaming Council to organize casino dealers and security officers and help UAW get contracts for 5000 workers

By the way, while you are thinking about people to follow on Twitter you might as well follow us on Twitter too.

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Employee Free Choice Act - Looking Ahead to 2010

This week the EFCA discussion is focusing primarily on whether there is enough support to pass it uncompromised in the 111th Congress. There are fewer co-sponsors this time and some of the key Democratic votes are a little squishy at this (admittedly very early) point in the game.

There are two schools of thought about how this might play out. One is that a compromise version will get voted on soon (one was quietly introduced in the House this week). The other scenario, and the one that I think is more likely, is that unions will want to count noses (and perhaps even force a filibuster) on the full monty before allowing any compromise at all.

The idea behind the latter strategy is this: Unions have spent a hell of a lot of money to buy this piece of legislation and they are looking for a return on that investment. They are also tired of getting left at the altar by their "friends" in Congress. So force a vote on cloture first - putting maximum pressure on moderates on both sides of the aisle - with a clear message that a vote against cloture is a vote for a major primary opponent in your next election. If Republicans filibuster it, so much the better (makes them look obstructionist, not to mention it's kind of tough to say you are protecting the right to vote by preventing a vote on a bill...). Then, if EFCA doesn't have the 60 votes it needs, they get some compromise version of it passed now and then roll up their sleeves for 2010 (if you are wondering which states will see a huge uptick in organizing after it passes just read on...).

What about 2010? Here are the vitals:

36 seats will be up for election, 19 Republican and 17 Democrat. The consensus tossups races are all Republican:

Mel Martinez (FL)

Jim Bunning (KY)

Kit Bond (MO)

Judd Gregg (NH)

George Voinovich (OH)

Specter (PA) is a key vote for unions on EFCA and he is probably in trouble no matter what he does. Specter - who will be 80 in 2010 - will be seeking his sixth term. He was diagnosed with cancer in 2005 and again in 2008 and barely beat Pat Toomey in the 2004 primary (Toomey is probably going to run again in 2010).

So these states will be where all the action is in 2010 (and probably hotbeds for organizing activity in the meantime - you know, growing the grass roots...). We'll obviously be keeping you posted. We'll be posting a status report on the bills in the sidebar of the blog.

Friday, March 13, 2009

Bold Union Strategy

This article out of Washington State points to two strategies working against American businesses and workers. Interestingly, the focus of this article is actually on the less alarming of the two.

Apparently, a veteran official of the Washington State Labor Council wrote a memo outlining possible strategies to pursue this week in hopes of getting a vote on a new piece of union-friendly legislation. The email was sent to a number of labor leaders, and copied to four lawmakers. One of the strategies equated to a threat to withhold future campaign funding for members of the congress that went against Big Labors wishes. It is possibly a violation of regulations that state that
lobbyists cannot exercise "any undue influence, extortion or unlawful retaliation on any legislator by reason of the legislator's position with respect to or vote upon any pending or proposed legislation.”

All of the above is typical union tactics, just your average pay-to-play at work. The more sinister component that is almost overlooked by the article is the nature of the bill being proposed. The bill is called the “Worker Privacy Act,” (Senate Bill 5446, and House Bill 1528), and the bill

would prohibit an employer from requiring an employee to attend a meeting, or listen to, respond to, or participate in any communication relating to political, labor or religious matters. This would include talks about unions and charitable giving.

Whoa! Another blatant attempt to curtail free speech rights, couched in the politically correct jargon of “Worker Privacy.” And, another sly move by Big Labor to tighten the noose on American businesses, taking the fight to the state level in case the Employee Free Choice Act flounders on the national stage, or is compromised to lose some of it’s teeth.

The major ingredient to management winning a union election (beyond positive employee relations practices) is the ability to communicate the benefits of a direct relationship between an employee and his employer, and to provide truthful information about union operations and the collective bargaining process (as opposed to the union organizer’s promises). Although meetings are not the only way to communicate, it is perhaps the strongest tool in the tool box, because management can control the timing, gauge the feedback, and insure all employees participate. There is no way to force an employee to read a flyer or a web site.

I expect to see similar legislation popping up in state congresses all over the country. American businesses better be prepared to take the fight to the state level. Secondly, they should take a proactive stance in how they communicate to their employees about union-related issues. It is no longer a valid strategy to ignore union issues until organizing activity is detected. I heartily recommend starting now to create other communication vehicles that employees want to access, such as company newsletters, white papers or booklets, or employee-centric web sites. If you need help developing the content, or even the vehicle, feel free to contact us – we’ve been doing this for over 25 years.

Thursday, March 12, 2009

Dose of Reality?

Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas seems to be connecting the dots in the brouhaha over the Employee Free Choice Act, along with a few others. Let's follow Senator Lincolns plausible stream of thought: the largest employer in Arkansas is...WalMart. Analysts at Citigroup in New York downgraded their WalMart recommendation to a hold instead of a buy because...passage of the EFCA could force increased labor costs and limit expansion. I want to be seen on the side of the Employee Free Choice Act because...I'm for loss of jobs for my constituency???

Although Lincoln was in favor of the EFCA in the 2007 debate, she is now hedging her bets.
“Right now, my number one priority is strengthening our state’s economy and putting 90,000 jobless Arkansans back to work,” Lincoln said in a statement.
Even if reason doesn't seem to prevail, if opponents of this horrible legislation can focus the energies of some of the larger business interests at other Democratic Senators, the bill may yet be defeated, at least in it's most egregious form.

EFCA Debate Cranks Up In Congress

I won't say much about this - watch for yourself. Big Labor is pushing hard trying to get their paid-for Senators to carry their water, but I don't know if they have big enough yokes to carry that much water up the size of the hill they may be facing! America is finally starting to take notice, and I think this is one reason the Employee Free Choice Act was introduced this week - to beat the working people to the punch before they know what hit them.

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

18 Democratic Senators Fail to Co-Sponsor EFCA

Here are some Senators you need to be talking to if you want to stop EFCA. There are 40 cosponsors on S.560, the Employee Free Choice Act, which was introduced today. No cosponsors are Republicans. The 18 D’s who are not cosponsors are:

  • Baucus
  • Bayh
  • Bennet
  • Bingaman
  • Conrad
  • Dorgan
  • Feinstein
  • Hagan
  • Kohl
  • Landrieu
  • Lincoln
  • McCaskill
  • Nelson (NE)
  • Pryor
  • Tester
  • Udall (CO)
  • Warner
  • Webb
Hat tip to Worker Freedom.

Employee Free Choice Act of 2009 Introduced

The Employee Free Choice Act of 2009 was introduced in the House and Senate today. Let the games begin. If your company has not communicated to managers, employees and stakeholders about the Employee Free Choice Act and its devastating impact on American businesses (not to mention American workers...) you might want to get started on that. Tomorrow would be a good day.

Tuesday, March 03, 2009

Unions and the Future (or Not)

Seth Godin, one of my favorite bloggers in the sphere of marketing and business, posted a great commentary on another typical detriment of unions - their propensity to hang on to the status quo when the world about them is changing. He highlights all of the energy and money squandered on union lobbying, when most of the lobbying efforts are actually fighting against the direction in which the world of global business is heading. What Seth doesn't point out as clearly as he could have is that often this direction is driven by the momentum of the will of the customers these businesses serve. Just another glimpse into the failure of unions to be relevant today.

Employee Free Choice Act - Introduced March 9th?

EFCA Now (a blog sponsored by the Security, Police and Fire Professionals Association) is reporting that the EFCA will be introduced by Representative George Miller and Senator Ted Kennedy next Monday, March 9th. They say the reasons for the "early" introduction are to pre-empt business lobbying and because they believe they have 60 votes in the Senate. We'll see.

Interestingly, they are saying it will be introduced in the House first (lately speculation has been it would be introduced in the Senate first due to some waffling by moderate Democrats in the House).