Quantcast
MobileRJ | RSS TwitterTwitter FacebookFacebook E-mail Alerts
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

Opinion
Nov. 30, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

JOHN BRUMMETT: Not now on card check

JOHN BRUMMETT
MORE COLUMNS

Some might recall that I wound up in the fine conservative town of Fort Smith, Ark., shortly before the election to address the local chamber of commerce.

I got pigeon-holed at the bar by old boys with Baldor Electric. That's an international giant in the manufacture of electric motors that maintains its headquarters in Fort Smith.

Most Popular Stories
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: What stops mass murderers? A gun
  • SHERMAN FREDERICK: Call evil by its rightful name
  • EDITORIAL: Terrorism on trial
  • EDITORIAL: A pre-9/11 approach to terror
  • LETTERS: Public-sector workers are still doing well
  • LETTERS: Harry Reid: Working hard for all Americans
  • EDITORIAL: They took our jobs!
  • EDITORIAL: 'That's the ticket!'
  • Our politicians are the greatest, all right
  • EDITORIAL: I believe in free speech, but ...




    • These front-office fellows sounded the alarm about "card check," or the "Employee Freedom of Choice Act." As is so often the case in modern politics, sentiment dictates nomenclature.

    This is the bill unions covet so they may impose a union on a work force if more than half the employees sign a card. Unions went to the mat this year for Barack Obama and Democratic congressional candidates. Now they want their reward.

    This is the bill management genuinely seems to fear as doomsday. It says the measure will make it harder for those who provide jobs and that it will do so with disastrous timing, at the very point the nation's economy so teeters on collapse that the government has had to provide quasi-socialistic bailouts.

    Denied a secret-ballot election, workers will be strong-armed by unions to sign these cards, management says.

    Unions counter that management wants to keep that 40-day interim between the calling of an election and the secret-ballot vote to strong-arm workers with the implicit or explicit threat of a loss of jobs altogether if unions come in.

    Unions say accurately that the Bush administration has tilted the playing field to management, which says that, even if that's so, Obama mustn't overcompensate.

    I promised the Baldor fellows I'd get back with them. I've now met with senior management. I've toured a plant. I've crammed on the issue.

    I essentially took a position the other day, though I finessed it through U.S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark.

    I wrote of her being on the spot, a Democrat needing to oblige a party payoff to labor, but one from an anti-union McCain state where she'll stand for election in two years.

    I quoted her as saying the wiser course -- the better way to help both employers and employees -- would be to begin this new administration seizing the moment on health care reform and economic stimulus and energy independence, not something immediately polarizing like card check.

    I agreed.

    She declined, though, to say how she'd vote, if forced, on the measure. Her neutrality got her a couple of mildly unhappy questions from a business audience the other day.

    When she said she was concerned about workers, a construction company executive told her that worrying about workers was one thing, but that she shouldn't pretend that facilitating quick-and-easy unions was helping workers.

    A new administration gets defined by its beginning. Bill Clinton was in trouble from the get-go because he took the oath of office in one breath and in the next was strung out on gays in the military.

    Obama likely will meet a similar fate if he begins his administration with a payoff to labor that galvanizes the business community's fear of him.

    As Lincoln advises both conveniently and wisely, he ought to prioritize smartly and strike first instead on economic stimulus, health care and energy independence. He needs to tell labor that his administration will be infinitely friendlier in terms of regulations and practices, but that card check must wait.

    I am far more certain of the political wisdom of that than about which side is right. But I am reasonably confident that labor is going to have a better time of it during an Obama administration even if it still has to contend with 40-day delays before secret-ballot elections.

    John Brummett, an award-winning columnist for the Arkansas News Bureau in Little Rock, is author of "High Wire," a book about Bill Clinton's first year as president. His e-mail address is jbrummett@ arkansasnews.com.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 16 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    patrick wrote on December 01, 2008 09:21 AM: TimeRanger:

    Dressing up a pig don't change the pig none; right to work means right to fire and nothing more.

    Right to fire means any business can fire any employee for any reason. I don't like your hair after 30 years of work, YOU'RE FIRED. I don't like the fact that you like football after 25 years, YOU'RE FIRED. I don't like the fact that your a republican, YOU'RE FIRED. I don't like the dress you wear, YOU'RE FIRED. I don't like the fact that your old, YOU'RE FIRED. I don't like the fact that your white, YOU'RE FIRED. I don't like the fact that you're catholic, YOU'RE FIRED.

    This, is what a "right to work" state means.

    YOU'RE FIRED.


    TimeRanger wrote on November 30, 2008 11:24 PM: Patrick,
    "Right To Work" means that a person does NOT have to join a union to be employed in his/her chosen profession, unlike Michigan which has "closed shops" where you MUST join the union and pay dues, just to be employed.

    How productive is it when a company has to jump through a myriad of hoops - often over several months - to terminate an employee who has dependability issues, substance abuse problems, or refuses to work by established methods/procedures? The company is on the hook for wages and bennies until a termination agreement can be reached with the union. Is this fair to anyone - the workers that must pick up after the slacker, the company, etc etc?


    Bozo D Clown wrote on November 30, 2008 08:33 PM: Anyone that thinks that we want to keep unions out in order to stifle wages is ignorant, to say the least. Patrick... I'm talking specifically to you !! Wages are not the issue, nor is Insurance, 401s, etc. etc. The unions bring with them work slowdowns, stewards, icewater, and all types of BS that we should not have to endure, as this is a "Right To Work State".


    patrick wrote on November 30, 2008 07:19 PM: Steve:

    You misunderstood. What I said was that California attracts "the highest of high tech WORKERS..."

    Of course, it would be pointless to mention that the REASON those workers continue to pour into California is BECAUSE the highest of high tech COMPANIES are in the state since you knew that.

    Voting with their feet; wonder why they aint pouring into Nevada what with all the beloved "free market" advantages of this state.

    Idiots.


    Steve wrote on November 30, 2008 05:18 PM: Patrick,

    Name those businesses you CLAIM are moving to California; especially the "highest of the hight tech".


    Get Real wrote on November 30, 2008 04:06 PM: This is a BAD ACT! I agree that the NLRB Act does need some tweaking but simple cards is not the answer.

    Maybe if someone had to go to their website and mail the cards ON THEIR OWN directly to the NLRB or another clear and transparent that it was entirely the FREE CHOICE of the employee it would have more support.

    Doing away with a Secret Ballot destroys American values that we should all respect. EVERY election has a period of time between the primary race (gathering cards) and in between (campaigning) and election day (secret). Anyone can talk about companies pushing for no votes but the fact is ONLY THE EMPLOYEE MAKES A TRUE FREE CHOICE IN THE BALLOT BOX.

    Also, only about half of organizing campaigns are successful. They are gathering more than 50 percent of cards during these campaigns already. They are losing because of their pressure and co-worker pressure and signing cards and then voting against them in the ballot election.

    Go figure rob people of their voting rights, I guess we will not be Frenchmen!


    patrick wrote on November 30, 2008 01:55 PM: TimeRanger:

    "Right to work" eh, guess that's Orwellian double-speak. What it means is that employers have the RIGHT to fire anyone for any reason.

    Right to work, another republican misnomer brought to you by the same people that brought you the "Patriot Act".

    Maybe TimeRanger you can tell me why, in a right to work state like Nevada, with a non-existent state income tax, WHY American industry is not POURING into our beautiful state, and instead that bastion of "socialism" California, that has some of the highest state taxes, and highest levels of regulation, is diversified and continues to attract the highest of high tech workers?

    LOL


    TimeRanger wrote on November 30, 2008 01:15 PM: Frank M - did you happen to notice that the manufacturers that you listed opted to make their products in "Right-To-Work" states and not Michigan? Michigan has everything an auto manufacturer needs - water transportation for raw materials (AND those materials), factory space, a willing skilled labor force...EVERYHING except the Right-To-Work.

    The government must NOT kowtow to the unions' demands for "card-check" and keep one of the bastions that this country was built on - Secret Ballots.


    Frank M wrote on November 30, 2008 10:24 AM: Card Check would level the playing field with Honda, Nissan and Toyota. BUT, how long do you think they would continue building here if that were to happen?


    M wrote on November 30, 2008 10:17 AM: The time for a Union is a thing of the past. Just look at the auto industry in these terrible economic times. The UAW is choking them to death. How can it be reasonable to pay a line worker $75/hr and be competitive? Good companies want to take care of their employees with good health benefits, profit sharing, 401K matching and other benefits. A Union stands in the way of all of that. We see it across America where Unions are forcing companies into bankruptcy. Can that be good for employees? Kick the unions out of the big 3 and let them be competitive again against there foreign non-union competitors.

    Card Check is a one way street to more lost jobs!


    Read All Comments