Sunday, December 21, 2008

This makes no sense

With Democrat Barack Obama headed to the White House, the unions who heavily supported him in his run against John McCain are looking to call in some favors. According to a recent AP story, their first priority is to win approval of legislation that would compel businesses to recognize labor unions as soon as more than 50 percent of a work force signs union cards. Labor leaders contend employers have relied on secret-ballot elections to arm-twist and intimidate workers into nixing unions. Employers, however, say there's a much greater chance of coercion when all the union has to do is get a sufficient number of signatures on union cards. It seems pretty clear to me that employers are correct on this issue. The reason we have secret ballots in this country is to protect people from being subjected to mistreatment because of the way they vote. It's obvious to me that there's a much greater possibility of browbeating and intimidation if the union-card system were to be approved. With a secret-ballot election, employees can express their true feelings about unions without fear of reprisal. There are plenty of more important economic issues facing the incoming president. He should forget about this one.



Anonymous Anonymous said...

This will be one of the test of "change". Will Obama be a leader and bring about fundamental change, or will he be a political hack that will turn back the clock to a worse time? The answer remains to be seen..

December 22, 2008 at 1:30 AM  
Blogger Roger said...

When this issue was raised during the election cycle, I was amazed that such a measure would even get consideration. Then, the candidate Obama said he would make this measure one of the first priorities when reaching the White House. Whew! I don't get it.

Secret ballot is the foundation of democracy. It makes no difference if it be a presidential election, a school board election, or a local community organization election. And, it should not matter that secret ballot extend to workers' organizations. To suggest a non-secret ballot on whether to unionize or not is digging away at something very fundamental. If this measure goes forward and the union gets their way, what will the next front for such an attack? Other developing nations strive to reach the point of secret ballot, to relieve themselves from restraint. But, yet here in this matter, the freedom is being stripped from the citizens.

December 22, 2008 at 9:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Because unions have trouble surviving in a free society today. Or at least they do when run as they are now, basically excuses for thuggery and misusing their members money.
Can anyone believe that men like Trumka and Clemmy Allen have the actual best interest of the worker on their minds? Or are they interested more in taking care of themselves?

Son of a union man

December 22, 2008 at 9:55 AM  
Blogger Dale Lolley said...

Could you imagine if government elections were held to the same standard?
But Obama's got to pay back the unions for their support, so I don't doubt the Dems will push this through.
And it will keep those jobs moving overseas.

December 22, 2008 at 10:16 PM  
Blogger Ellipses said...

Why, exactly, does he have to "pay back the unions?"

If it's simply because they supported him in the general election, I'd say "good for you, but so did millions of other people"... If it's because he needs their support in '12, I'd think he stands to gain more from not pandering to the unions in this case than he does for "paying them back"

December 23, 2008 at 6:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah Ellispes, you don't seem to understand politics. The unions give money, lists of names, names that give money and promises that they cannot fufill.

December 23, 2008 at 12:20 PM  
Blogger Ellipses said...

Anonymous... I understand politics... what I don't understand is why at one moment everyone says that politicians don't keep their word and at another moment insist that they have this deep loyalty to campaign contributors that overrides any and all logical thought process...

He has nothing to lose by not being beholden to the unions... that's politics

December 23, 2008 at 2:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Again Ellipses you don't understand that the unions hold more than money and support over people's heads. Knowledge of mistakes, problems, sexual deviancy are all used to control and destroy political figures.
In addition, many political figures keep their words to those that help financially, not those that just vote or in worse case don't vote, but just complain.
Two worlds and those outside rarely understand those inside.

December 25, 2008 at 6:20 PM  
Blogger Ellipses said...

So, the unions have some knowledge of sexual deviancy on the part of Obama?


Merry Christmas

December 25, 2008 at 8:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, they could or staffers, or other corruption. Knowledge is power and to believe that those in power are choir boys is unrealistic. Sex and money are the drivers of those in power. (except for those that crave power for power's sake. They are the most dangerous).

December 26, 2008 at 2:06 AM  
Blogger Ellipses said...

Bad analogy on the choir boys :-)

December 26, 2008 at 8:04 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home