- enhanced penalties for violations
- limitations on employer free speech during union drives
- fast elections, preferably a week from showing of interest
- expedited certification of elections
- binding arbitration for first contracts, not reached by traditional bargaining within 90? days
- Without these terms, Shaw suggests labor invest its political money in organizing, rather than supporting Democrats in 2010
The single most important item is item 5. Labors organizing failures are in large part due to the deficiency in the product they sell. They sell a service - representation of the membership. If a collective bargaining agreement is not reached, or if the one ultimately negotiated provides little protection and benefit for workers, the product is not attractive to workers, especially since it comes at a steep price monthly dues. If a new law guarantees a first contract will be reached, under threat of the imposition of one by an arbitrator, the union product receives a major enhancement, at least in theory.
Labor's problem is less about the election process and employers abuse of the organizing process. Labor can win elections. Labor's win rate averages over 50% for years,
and 60% in 2008. The problem is labor cannot interest enough workers to agree to pay a union to represent them because the product of representation is often deficient, particularly outside of industries that have historically been heavily unionized, like the automakers.
Labor's goal is to be able to organize at a higher volume, attract more members, more quickly. The current election process is not fundamentally broken. It affords a civilized environment in which a discussion of the merits of unionization or remaining union free can be digested by employees. Thats not to say there are not abuses. The problem is the penalties for violation of the rules are not sufficient to cause some employers to comply with the protections the NLRA offers. Official NLRB statistics establish union claims about employer wrongdoing have been
wildly inflated.
In an expedited election environment Labor wants to talk to employees in secret for weeks or even months, to sell the employees on buying the unions services, and then call for a quick election to deprive employees from a meaningful opportunity to hear the other side of the story. Labor seeks this because it knows there is a lawful, factual and persuasive other side. It is that factual reality which employees embrace when they decide not to pay the union to represent them.
More related web entries for - The new EFCA - what labor wants:
Several in-the-know readers have passed along an incendiary anonymous memo making the rounds among administrators and trustees regarding fin...
To paraphrase Mark Harris , it seems that Scott Rothstein continues to rule our world. Here's the latest: 1. Bill Scherer sues the fir...
So who else is going to the Federation Judicial Reception tonight: This year’s Judicial Reception will recognize three outstanding legal pr...
When I first read this story about a potential conflict of interest involving the "extremely Floridian" GrayRobinson that is bei...
Posts
