You do not see a lot of news coverage about positive effects of unionization. But it seems the UFCW and Smithfield's have made nice with positive side effects at the world's largest hog slaughterhouse. On the job injuries, absenteeism and turnover are all down since the collective bargaining agreement was reached.

45,000 Verizon employees on the east coast are on strike. Verizon intends to continue operations with management personnel and others.

The NFLPA ratified the collective bargaining agreement with the team owners.

Labor has targeted Target for organizing efforts. None of its 1700+ stores is organized. But a petition was filed at a New York store, and the election results are in. By a vote of 137 - 85 the employees rejected the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) as their representative for purposes of collective bargaining.

As the high school baseball season winds down and the major league season ramps up, I spend a considerable amount of time organizing a youth baseball program. I love baseball and am fortunate to be able to watch my son play his senior year in high school, and also, I can walk around the corner and watch one of the finest college programs. Michael Weiner is the Executive director of the Major League Baseball Players Association. He recently spoke at Penn State about collective bargaining and what is on the horizon in the major leagues. Interesting read.

Mike Florio analyzes the ten questions the players union has posed to the NFL.

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll finds 62% of Americans strongly oppose stripping public employees of the right to collective bargaining while at the same time even larger percentages think public employees should contribute more to their retirement benefits (68%) and pay more for their healthcare (63%). By a whopping 77% those surveyed believed public sector union members should have the same rights as private sector union members. To me, none of this is surprising or even incongruous. Wisconsin's Governor Walker wants to eliminate bargaining with the unions representing state employees. That position has little to do with reducing the budget deficit. The unions have already agreed concessions are in order. The employer has the right to refuse any demands made by the union. Only if the employer agrees do politicians need to man up and say "no" in bargaining, not eliminate bargaining altogether. This is a political issue, not an economic one. The political objective is to weaken unions which support the other political party. The problem is, the public does not agree with the objective, even though they agree with hard bargaining with public sector employees to carry some of the burden of reducing the state budget deficit.

Looks like the NFL/NFLPA mediation is getting serious. Here is the statement from the mediator. Also now he says we ain't commenting anymore. Sounds like progress otherwise everybody would be posturing talking.

A new USAToday/Gallup poll finds 61% oppose taking away public sector employees collective bargaining rights.

Chris Bowers at Daily Kos has a detailed piece with video about the remarkable demonstrations ongoing in Wisconsin as Governor Walker continues to target public sector unions. Of course its favorable to labor . . .

Massive protests have erupted in Wisconsin in response to Republican efforts to repeal collective bargaining for public employees. Wisconsin was first in the nation to grant collective bargaining rights (1959) to public sector employees. Not something you will see in this part of the world.

Sometimes employers can make critical mistakes that create serious problems on their own. It appears this supermarket employer has done so. In collective bargaining, an employer creates a huge, unnecessary problem for itself when it claims it cannot afford to meet a union's economic demands. When the employer does rely upon economic justifications to reject union economic demands, the union is entitled to examine the employers books and other financial data in order to bargain effectively. When the company refuses to provide the financials, the NLRB will issue a complaint, and in the linked article, it appears the NLRB has sought immediate federal court injunctive relief. Had the employer rejected the union's demands, and maintained that the demands were not in the best interests of the company (as opposed to the position taken - that it could not afford the proposals), it would not have exposed its financial data to union scrutiny.

It may be only a press release, but it was picked up as news and it conveys a powerful rebuttal to the union's posturing in the Mott's strike (as well as to Secretary of Labor Solis who suggested the parties need to come back to the bargaining table).

The NLRB is considering a different standard for determining the appropriate bargaining unit in longterm care facilities. The Board recently solicited briefs on the issue. The prediction is the Obama Board will allow much more flexibility in carving out job classification units in long term care facilities. Rather than presuming only a unit including non-supervisory nursing employees, housekeepers, laundry and dietary employees is appropriate, separate units may be ordered for one or more departments. This would  significantly advantage piecemeal organizing of facilities and Balkanized collective bargaining.