In 1978, I moved to Cincinnati and got a job working in a non-union lumberyard. The job paid $2.65 an hour. After a couple of months, I decided to move back to Kansas City. I got another job, this time for a union lumberyard. It paid $7.80 an hour.

I got a real kick out of this:

union organizers “coerce” workers

So a union organizer who has absolutely no ability to discipline or fire a worker can “coerce” workers, but their bosses can’t? Shyeah, right.

That’s a valuable piece of paper. It puts a significant burden of proof on the employer to justify its decision to dismiss–the employer would have to show evidence that the employee had committed wrongdoing and that her termination was consistent with other employees regardless of their card-check status. Even in right-to-work states, and even under this DOL.

Even if the employment contract is “at will” (i.e., they simply don’t have to give a reason if they want to terminate you)?

Also, it seems to me they could just bide their time, so that the connection isn’t so obvious.

That is, you sign the card, going on record and thus you become a target. Now I’ll agree that having the card is useful if they’re stupid enough to fire you immediately. But what if they bide their time, doing whatever they need to slowly build up a case against you, and then, say, a year later, they fire you. At that point the card is ancient history and they have a well-documented set of charges against you for a legitimate termination.

So again, how is this an improvement over being able to cast a vote that management can’t ever find out about?

It seems like the real objection to the NLRB process is not the secret ballot aspect but rather that they move so damn slowly

People need their jobs, and when employers start making their life harder on the job because they support a union

Right, but how do they know who to harass? If it’s a secret ballot, how do they know who’s supporting the union? And if they just aimlessly harass people, that should only make it more likely that they’ll vote for the union; if management can’t find out how you voted, then there’s no downside to voting yes.

Or is it that the NLRB is cheating and revealing to the company who voted how?

The majority verification (card-check) enables workers to sign a card and indicate their desire for a union much more quickly, saving them months and sometimes years of harassment involved in the NLRB process. (And that’s just one reason).wrog @ 17

Something I still don’t get:

Why is a card check, where the employee has to a sign a card and declare his/her public support and thus be subject to reprisals, better than a secret ballot where s/he does not?

How is it even possible for the employer coerce employees at all? If the ballot is secret, they can’t find out who voted for the union and so there’s no one to punish. Unless they punish everyone, by, say, closing down an entire plants, but it seems to me they could do that in response to a card-check, too.

So what am I missing?

They always want more, more, and more !

Something I still don’t get:

Why is a card check, where the employee has to a sign a card and declare his/her public support and thus be subject to reprisals, better than a secret ballot where s/he does not?

Card-check is almost always paired with a Neutrality Agreement, in which the company agrees beforehand to stay out of the organization campaign. Company management is not allowed to lobby against union organization.

Even without neutrality, if an employee has a signed piece of paper stating that she is in favor of organizing, and then she is fired by management, she has solid evidence for legal proceedings. Instead of a she-said, they-said situation, she has a piece of paper backing up her claim that she was unlawfully dismissed for expressing her desire to organize.

That’s a valuable piece of paper. It puts a significant burden of proof on the employer to justify its decision to dismiss–the employer would have to show evidence that the employee had committed wrongdoing and that her termination was consistent with other employees regardless of their card-check status. Even in right-to-work states, and even under this DOL.

Why is a card check, where the employee has to a sign a card and declare his/her public support and thus be subject to reprisals, better than a secret ballot where s/he does not?

How is it even possible for the employer coerce employees at all? If the ballot is secret, they can’t find out who voted for the union and so there’s no one to punish. Unless they punish everyone, by, say, closing down an entire plants, but it seems to me they could do that in response to a card-check, too.

So what am I missing?