News & Commentary
Unions are Fine, but Vote Should be Free
by Carrie L. Lukas
March 18, 2009
In the March 11 op-ed titled "Workers need protection--and the EFCA," William J. Gimbell III writes, "Our country needs the Employee Free Choice Act," but he studiously avoids discussing what this legislation would actually entail, and instead attempts to convince the reader that workers need unions.
That's a different debate. No one is disputing the right of workers to create a union, but workers should also be free not to unionize.
And what Mr. Gimbell avoids revealing is that the so-called Employee Free Choice Act would deny workers the right to a legitimate, free, and fair election on this question.
The act would strip workers of their right to have a secret ballot and create a process that no one would suggest for any other election.
Companies would be required to recognize a union after union organizers have collected a majority of signatures among workers.
This leaves workers vulnerable to being badgered and pressured by both unions and companies.
Whether it is electing our president or a local school board, we recognize that people need to be able to vote their conscience without fear of repercussions.
Mr. Gimbell suggests that seven out of 10 non-union workers want to be in a union. If that is true, the unions should have no problem winning during a legitimate, private vote.
Carrie Lukas
Washington
The writer is vice president, policy and economics, Independent Women's Forum.
3 Comments
William J. Gimbel III | March 19, 2009, 8:25pm | #
Ms. Lucas if you took the time to read the act you would notice the word CHOICE; yes it is there, for a reason. You see the act would give the employees the CHOICE (Democratic?) to do either or. Thank you though for responding, however in the future, do some research please! I ask this Ms Lukas because so many people just watch the tube and then parrot what they hear. In your case perhaps I’m wrong. I’d like to give a current example of how this happens today. On C-Span last week I watched in utter horror as ( Republicans) Senators and Congressmen alike passionately declared EFCA” the most undemocratic piece of legislation to come before this house in years.” Talk about misinformed and out of touch. Then again maybe our information source is say the Wall Street Journal a venerable paper indeed even I read it, but I would not expect to find a favorable view of labors concerns now would I? We all need to open our minds to other opinions in order to gain a basis for what is or is not fact.
For those who have never visited your representatives I ask you to do so, what you’ll learn will perhaps put into perspective my thoughts on the C-Span example. Our Reps you see have a man for certain issues that he puts his faith in to do his research and then make policy. This process is at best vulnerable to all kinds of influence, good and bad, depending on your view. While this is most prevalent it’s not to say that our Reps don’t do any heavy lifting of their own. Their jobs are a difficult and arduous journey through the myriad issues of our times and all that is crammed into not enough time.
What workers have been up against in this country, more so since Bush became the President, has been Businesses and Government both striving in one voice to sow the seeds of fear about unions, along with every vile tactics you could imagine. I call this economic terrorism. Ms. Lukas, intimidation by both sides you say would result from this bill; excuse me if I’m not buying what you are selling! I believe this to be nothing but a red herring, casting yourself as being fair and noble minded. Where were people such as yourself when Mr. Bush and his cronies at the NLRB and the FLRA were disgracing themselves by redefining law? In closing Ms. Lukas if you had the benefit of my experience you would know who the real bogeymen are and it’s not the unions!
I remain fraternally yours,
William J. Gimbel III
Franklin Lodge 2135 IAM&AW
Peter Rabbit | March 20, 2009, 8:50am | #
Mr. William J.the III, if people wanted your product I'm sure they would vote for it in a normal election. The fact is you want to scare people into giving their money to the "Big Union" boys. Hey, let's just ship all of our jobs overseas. Why do I have this vision of some union thug standing over my wife saying, "just sign this, it'll be good for you and your kids. You want the best for them don't you? Do you like your house?" Forget it! Let's face it - no one wants your product or your lies.
William J. Gimbel III | March 20, 2009, 3:16pm | #
I respect your opinion but my good friend peter we have seen the scary side now for years. What pray tell is wrong with people having a voice in their work place? A voice Peter usally results in a fair and safe woring environment. Should you decide to take some time and read you labor history in this country you might just get some perspective. If per chance you wish to blame relocation of jobs on the unions then you truly are a fool. Unions work with employers to better the workplace and in some instances even vastly increase production and quality, you won't read that in any buisness magazine or newspaper but it is a fact and lets not forget wages average 30% more. I take umbrage to the union thug remark I assure you there are some that may give us a bad name however if you were one bit fair minded you'd know well their is no bottom to the depths Businessmen will plumb to eraticate the (evil) people that want to be treated fair. Ignorance is truly bliss good luck to you. WJGIII