Unions and Secret Ballots.

@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
December 4, 2008 8:29am CST
Union leaders and Obama are working to change the way workers unionize a workplace. The secret ballot seems to be the enemy of all freedom to union leaders. Why? Because they can't control who votes for or against them. They want to know who voted for and against organizing a workplace. Unions are against secret ballots and right to work laws. Why? Because choice and freedom are not part of their agenda. It's just another example of how little union thugs care about freedom or workers. It's just another example of how they only understand force.
1 person likes this
5 responses
@iriscot (1289)
• United States
4 Dec 08
Hey Para, I agree with you on this subject! I have two sons who are union workers and some of the stories they tell are almost unbelievable about the union "bullies" who force voting to suit them. I think the only fair way is by secret ballot. My mother worked in a shoe factory that was almost like a "sweat shop" years ago. They weren't union and I used to believe strongly in unions. However, I have had mixed emotions about them over the last 30 or forty years. My first bad experience personally, happened when our business caught on fire and almost took me out of business. I was warned by union members that if I didn't use a union contractor to rebuild my building, the union would boycot and shut me down. So, I caved in and hired a union contractor. The irony of it was that not one of the union workers bought a service or product from me afterwards. I lost two good non-union customers and was made a fool of.
2 people like this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
4 Dec 08
Iriscot, as you see from my response below yours I'm very pro-union and the biggest part of me always will be because of my own personal experiences but I certainly disagree with what happened to you. I don't know all the details of your situation but I'll say this much, I certainly think the unions could be more flexible and sometimes their demands are unreasonable. You wrote about your sons' stories of union bullies and I'm certainly not doubting that for a second but I know first hand there are also probably many more bullies in management who, if not kept in check, would treat workers slightly worse than slaves on southern plantations were treated. Annie
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
5 Dec 08
There is a word for people who would take money they didn't earn... They are called thieves. Every worker, manager or anyone else who would sit on their butts all day then demand payment is no better than any other thief. These people aren't craftsmen, they aren't professionals and they definitely aren't honest. They are two bit thugs who deserve to lose their jobs. They are a menace to society.
1 person likes this
@oldboy46 (2129)
• Australia
5 Dec 08
There is a place for unions in the workplace. In the past unions did a great amount of good to get the working conditions and pay improved for many of their members. To a certain extent that is still the same situation today, at least in some working environments. Just as all employers are not bad and ready to do the "wrong thing" by their employees, not all unions officials are bad and ready to do harm to a business and the emoloyer. There is a mixture on "good and bad" on both sides and that will always be the case when you live in a democracy. There will always be those few employers will attempt to take advantage of some of their employees, usually those who are lacking in education r kniowledge. At the same time there some employees will abuse the system and look for ways to do less work for much more money. A reasonable union official should be able to help work through those issues and just as there are some terrible union officials, there are also good ones. With regard to the secret ballots for anything and that includes election of union officials, strike action or whatever, it should be secret. Those of us who live in a democratic society have a secret ballot when we elect our politicians who make major decisions that affect our life and so it should be the same for the unions. It is true that many union officials are against the secret ballot, at least when it comes to union issues that is. That is part of the "siege mentality" where someone is almost paranoid they might lose face if the members vote against what the uniin recommends.
2 people like this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
5 Dec 08
I disagree, but I admit I'm speaking from the outside looking in. I know there are a lot of great people who are in unions, but I would highly doubt there is a single decent, honest person in union leadership anywhere. Why would I say that? Is there a union leader anywhere who would tell the employees of a non union shop that they have it great already and they should quit their whining? If it were true and they wouldn't, then they aren't honest.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
4 Dec 08
Ted, I'm going to try to bring back the old objective me you said you missed with this one...lol! I'm a firm believer in unions because I know first hand that without on there would be many workers working in less than good conditions for substandard wages and little or not benefits. How about I give you that there are some thugs among union leadership if you give me that there are also some thugs in management? Regarding the issue of the secret ballot, I have mixed feelings and I admit to being a bit confused. In my experience and those of people I've known the secret ballot would seem to benefit the unions simply because it was management who would try to bully people into not voting for a union and in some cases they'd get their way and then if they knew who had been in favor of unionizing those workers would be "in for it". I've also seen the other side when I worked for the USPS and there were two carriers who had chosen not to join the union and some of the carriers gave them a hard time about it. Not anything serious but they'd let them know now and then that they resented the fact that these guys were enjoying all the benefits fought for by the union but weren't dues paying members, which I guess is understandable. In our union, the union would still be required to fight for a carrier whether he or she was a member or not. I'm the first one to admit there are unions who make unreasonable demands, especially in tough economic times but having seen it from both sides I'll come down on the protection of those who do the real work every time over those in management who have never done the job but earn their high salaries and bonuses based on how much they can bully those who do. It really bothers me that some are trying to use the automakers requests for a bailout as a way to blame the union workers and get a step closer to busting the unions. I know there are those on the right who will say it's the "physical" workers' own faults they didn't go to college and learn how to do something else or that they didn't have the drive to start their own business, ya-da-ya-da, but the fact will always remain there will always be those who for what ever reason weren't suited for college or honestly weren't able to go to college and are better at doing manual labor such as jobs in construction, manufacturing, plumbing, etc. and we'll always NEED people to do these jobs. Many of the same people who are so against unions are also very anti-immigrant so does that mean they want our OWN people to do the jobs the illegal immigrants do for next to nothing without any union protection? Annie
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
4 Dec 08
Yeah, we will definitely agree that there are thugs on all sides, union, management and workers. I have nothing against unions existing, what I am against is any form of requirement for a person to join unions against their will. Yes, some people reap benefits without paying dues, but freedom works both ways whether the union, management or working thugs want it to or not. There are a lot of reasons the unions want to do away with secret ballots. When workers approach the unions with interest in organizing the workplace, one of the first things that happens is the union reps get cards passed around to the workers. The number of people signing the cards merely show the level of interest there is among the workers. Workers can sign those cards, but when it comes time to actually vote yea or nea about organizing, they can still vote against organizing. Traditionally a big percentage of the workers in a workplace sign the cards, but quite often the final vote comes out against organizing. The unions want the signitures on the cards to be the final vote. While it's true that management can also use the open voting against workers who vote to organize, if the signatures on the cards become the final vote, they won't be able to do much about it. On the other hand, if it becomes the final vote then the union thugs can see who voted against organizing and use it against them. Either way, no honest person would be against secret ballots... management, union, or worker. I am mixed on my feelings about unions because I've seen them help workers and I've seen them destroy jobs. I've seen workers bring in a union only to have pay and benefits go down, but I've also seen pay and benefits go up. The fact is, there is only 1 thing a union can guarantee absolutely, and that is you will be paying union dues. One thing I would ask any union and that is, if organization of workers is so important, are the employees of your union organized? In other words, is there anything between the management and workers of the union itself? If now, why not?
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
5 Dec 08
How much more should we borrow from China to bail out our companies? Every dime of all these bail outs is borrowed from somebody. Every dime of these bail outs reduces the value of every dollar in circulation. The bailout money will go to the companies, who will use it to secure more debt for themselves, only digging the hole deeper and deeper. The bail outs and government demands on the private sector are what got us into this mess... all the government can do is make the hole deeper. But hey, the ones digging the hole are working... right? FDR didn't do squat to end the depression. He only paid people to dig holes, then paid another group to fill them in.
2 people like this
@iriscot (1289)
• United States
5 Dec 08
Let's expand things a little here. Here is an "what if". What if the government doesn't LOAN bailout money to Chrysler, Ford and GM. And suppose that GM, Ford and Chrysler are forced into chapter 11. How many workers do you think those companies will have to let go in order to survive? Where are those workers going to find new jobs? A steel plant not far from St. Louis will be shutting down soon. A few more thousand workers without jobs. Every day we hear of companies either going out of business or workers being laid off. What will all of these workers do to be able to feed their families and pay the mortgage or rent? I was around during the "Great Depression" and believe me, there were NO JOBS to be had. Some people don't like FDR but he got people to working again, not at union jobs or union wages, but they could at least feed their families. Are we going to have to have another government funded work program like the WPA or CCC? Who knows what is going to happen in the next couple of years. These highly paid union workers may have to work for a lot less money if they can't help the industry by making some concessions, and if the industry doesn't get some help. Personally, I believe that if the government can bail out Citi Corp and the housing industry, they should be able to put 35 billion of that 700 billion as a LOAN to the auto industry so they can at least try and get back on their feet. I drive a Buick LeSabre and love the car and I would like to be able to buy another one in a couple of years.
1 person likes this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
4 Dec 08
I know of one union right now...the one that's trying to get into my son-in-law's workplace...that has got to be pro secret ballot considering the outright hostility and threats coming from management. It's been shocking, especially considering how tied our hands were when a union tried to organize the staff at the college I used to work for. I had to follow specific written mandates from the Board but apparently those rules don't apply to everyone. My son-in-law has received both written and oral threats from management in the areas of job security, hours, pay raises and benefits since the union first came on the scene. The only saving grace for any of the employees who may be interested in joining the union has been their ability to cast their votes from home, either over the phone or the internet. In this case perhaps force is coming from both sides but, either way, these guys are all vulnerable. I hope these union leaders and Obama aren't able to overturn secret balloting. You should have the right to make your choice known or keep it private.
2 people like this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
4 Dec 08
Tell that to the unions that have lobbied Pelosi and Reid and paid megabucks to have Obama elected, all demanding they change the laws to remove secrecy from voting for unionization. I don't know how all the union leaders feel about it, but the major ones are all pushing to do away with secret ballots. The thing is, the point your son in laws workplace is at, the union would have been voted in with the cards so the management would have been silenced... along with anyone who didn't want the union.
2 people like this
• United States
2 Jan 09
No secret ballot, union vote passes, company comes after those who voted for the union in order to convince them to quit, union comes after those who voted against the union to get them to quit. No secret ballot, union vote fails, People voting for union get fired and people voting against get attacked by those voting for. Getting rid of secret ballots is good for only two groups: Union bosses who get their salary from union dues and democrat politicians who get their campaign funds from union dues.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
2 Jan 09
Actually they only help one group. Unethical criminals who profit from harrassment and coercion. There is NO difference between a boss, fellow employee or union leader who would harrass and coerce an employee. It's time we quit acting like one is better than the other.
1 person likes this