One thing that has not been mentioned of late is that effective 1/20 the rethugs will no longer have the bully pulpit at their disposal. I recognize that Obama will not use it to bully however, having an articulate spokesperson to articulate the issue and the facts will be a very welcome change.
383 hrs & 10 min

If it does I’ll become an ardent Hoyer supporter

Makes me want to get a job at Walmart.

Thank you Jane for watching the Faux so we don’t have to……

I do hope it is so…… not teasing from Hoyer who wouldn’t know a progressive idea or policy if it bit him….

Thanks Jane. digg

Well there are many who disagree that this doesn’t eliminate a secret ballot.

Make no mistake, workers are cajoled, pressured, and intimidated to sign a union card. The difference is now they get to cast a ballot in private to express their true desire.

If we are going to eliminate it for unions, then why don’t we just eliminate the secret ballot for all elections?

I’m sure the unions won’t mind making union dues deductions subject to worker’s desires either. After all, it’s all about employee’s free choice right?

Make no mistake, employers cajole,pressure,and intimidate workers to resist the union. Fixed it for you.
WTF?

Read a few webpages….
Wiki on Employee Free Choice

American Rights at Work

I know not to feed the trolls BUT NO WHERE will you find in any REAL write up about the Employee Free Choice act eliminates the secret ballot ONLY the wingnuts and the corportatists are saying it…… ya got your talking points from FAUX

I hope that this works out, but I’d be more confident if it were a Senate leader, not a House leader, who made the “three months” promise. We might have to wait for Franken and a second Illinois Dem to get it through.

EFCA will help restore the American middle class. Why not make it part of the stimulus package and have it on the President’s desk right after his inauguration, Steny?

Yes, employers, do (cajo[le], pressur[e], and intimidat[e]) and they have by far the greater advantage over union organizers since they can hire and fire. It’s clear that this imbalance of power in the workplace must be corrected.

VORE, instead of trolling, why not present some credible arguments how union organizing will hurt the American worker and the middle class that conservatives are working so hard to cripple as a political force?

Ever been through a union campaign? I’ve been through three of them and lived in a heavily union state (WV). Both sides cajole, pressure and intimidate and if you think otherwise you are either misinformed or naive. that’s why the worker needs to have a secret ballot where they can make their choice in private.

By Trolls do you mean someone who is not drinking the kool-aid and offers a different opinion or point of view?

I don’t watch ‘Faux’ find it creepy quite frankly.

Do you mean cite some statistics or study from some special interest group with an agenda?

Unions are the very thing they rail against – big business. They have done many wonderful things but they are not without their warts and problems.

I’ll ask my question again – if you are really for employee free choice then you’ll be in favor of leaving it up to each employee whether their dues are automatically deducted, right?

I’ll ask my question again – if you are really for employee free choice then you’ll be in favor of leaving it up to each employee whether their dues are automatically deducted, right?

I assume if they don’t want to pay for the union support, that those same individuals will forego any representation and benefit from the union as well? If that’s the case, they will have made their choice.

Or if they don’t want to work a union shop, they will elect to find other employment in the same field at a non-union shop? (most likely getting similar benefits due to the management trying to avoid having a union come in).

Either way works for me.

But don’t complain about the union while receiving the union benefits.

I assume if they don’t want to pay for the union support, that those same individuals will forego any representation and benefit from the union as well? If that’s the case, they will have made their choice.

That is called a ‘right-to-work’ state, just ask the unions if they are in favor of that kind of employee choice. It works very well from may point of view.

Oh yeah, that “right-to-work” really is wonderful when the US Senators from “right-to-work” states have to band together to force the wages and benefits in union companies down to the levels paid in their states.

shouldn’t those US Senators be more concerned with raising wages and benefits for workers in their states than in interfering with worker in other states?

Or is “right-to-work” just another slogan to force people into drudge jobs without actually paying the wages to the workers but assuring that the corporate grifters get their piece of the action?

Or is “right-to-work” just another slogan to force people into drudge jobs without actually paying the wages to the workers but assuring that the corporate grifters get their piece of the action?

Right-to-work is not a slogan it’s a policy and it works very well. Not sure how you equate it into forcing people into ‘drudge’ jobs. I worked in VA, a right-to-work state, and I don’t recall anyone being forced into anything other than being bound by the union contract. What I do recall is that about 30% of union workers in my workplace paid their dues… they had ‘free choice’.

Btw, those senators you reference – how many represent states with companies with their hand out because they are on the verge of bankruptcy?

Btw, those senators you reference – how many represent states with companies with their hand out because they are on the verge of bankruptcy?

How many represent states that gave the hand-outs to get the companies to show up in the first place?

Hand-outs are hand-outs, whether provided up front (subsidizing Japanese or Korean or German auto companies) or used to help US auto companies that helped us win wars against the Japanese and Germans and helped to build the middle class. Personally, I’d rather help the US companies, US workers, and US retirees and keep the US middle class viable with decent salaries.

Otherwise, who will be able to afford the products by any company?

How many represent states that gave the hand-outs to get the companies to show up in the first place?

Hand-outs are hand-outs, whether provided up front (subsidizing Japanese or Korean or German auto companies) or used to help US auto companies that helped us win wars against the Japanese and Germans and helped to build the middle class. Personally, I’d rather help the US companies, US workers, and US retirees and keep the US middle class viable with decent salaries.

Yes, handouts are handouts but I think there is a difference between money to start a plant, company, etc. and money to keep one if business who is failing due to poor performance. Either way, I’m not against the Big 3 getting their handout to stay upside right. I’ll be curious if they can stay there.

But that’s part of the problem. The plants in Tennessee, Alabama, South Carolina, and Kentucky were all subsidized. Those plants have not been in operation near long enough to be supporting the level of retirees as the Big 3 are doing. The Japanese companies do not have to worry about funding (directly) the health care of their workers at home.

So the Big 3 is working from an automatic disadvantage just for having been successful previously.

If the Toyota, Hyundai, Mercedes, BMW, and Nissan had not been subsidized, wouldn’t things look a lot more competitive?

And the Unions in Detroit had already gone a long way in give backs and implementing two tier wage systems.

Those plants have not been in operation near long enough to be supporting the level of retirees as the Big 3 are doing.

I don’t know this factually, but I bet they are offering ‘defined contribution’ and not ‘defined benefit’. If so, it will not be an issue.