Shortcuts

Connect with us on Facebook!
Subscribe.
[Feeds & Readers]
Follow us on Twitter!

Make us your home page!
Authors, sign in!

« The Medical Malpractice Myth, by Tom Baker | Main | Our New President Calls for Sacrifice »


Employee Free Choice Act and the Lesson of Smithfield Packing

By Dmitri Iglitzin
January 11, 2009

After fifteen years of struggle, the unlawful firing of union supporters, two lost elections run by the National Labor Relations Board, seven years of litigation over company abuses of workers and a federal racketeering lawsuit brought by the company against the United Food and Commercial Workers, the Smithfield Packing slaughterhouse in Tar Heel, N.C., has recognized its workers right to be represented by a union.

The workers did this without benefit of any federal law requiring employers to accept a union as the representative of their employers based on a majority of those workers having signed “authorization cards” so requesting --- a “card check” election. Said company spokesperson Dennis Pittman, this shows “that the union can win without a card check.”

Maybe. But to many people, including supporters of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), the proposed federal legislation that would authorize “card check” elections, the fact that it took fifteen years for 5,000 workers at one slaughterhouse to get union representation just shows how desperately that law is needed.

The undisputed number one priority of the labor movement is to pass EFCA. The United States Chamber of Commerce, on behalf of currently non-union companies, has promised to spend ten million dollars opposing that effort. Other corporate-funded groups, such as the Center for Union Facts and the deceptively named “Coalition for a Democratic Workplace,” as well as many individual companies, are making efforts of their own.

In a November 25, 2008, memo, for example, McDonald’s USA President Don Thompson urged 2,400 franchisees to “contact your U.S. senators and representatives to oppose” the Employee Free Choice Act. McDonald’s has formed an “internal response team” to help franchisees “actively participate in the opposition to EFCA.”

It is not surprising that the Chamber of Commerce and corporations who are still fighting yesterday’s battles are willing to work so hard to defeat EFCA. Given the importance of this bill to the survival of our country’s economy, however, perhaps there is hope that a “third way” could be followed. Perhaps, in these times of economic crisis, business can move beyond the old assumption that anything that is good for workers hurts their bosses, and vice versa.

Unions have certainly recognized the new realities. Just two days ago, on January 9, 2009, YRC Worldwide, the owner of trucking companies Yellow Transportation and Roadway Express, announced that the International Brotherhood of Teamsters has agreed for its members to take a 10% wage cut, due to the company’s precarious financial circumstance. In exchange, the Teamsters employees will receive a 15% ownership stake in the company.

The success of other companies, such as United Parcel Service, the world’s largest package delivery company, gives the lie to the idea that being a unionized company is bad for business. In its 2008 SEC 10-K filing, UPS cites its “good relations” with its “experienced and dedicated” employees, nearly 60% of whom are represented by labor unions (251,800, out of a total of 425,300), as part of the reason for its continuing success.

Perhaps all of the stakeholders in the American economy can finally realize what economists have long been aware of, that an organized work force can work hand in glove with organized employers for the benefit of the companies, the workers, and the consumers who need to be able to buy the products these companies make. A number of other major companies, such as AT&T, Harley Davidson and Kaiser Permanente, have already agreed voluntarily to recognize a union when a majority of their employees express their interest in doing so.

If this insight continues to spread, perhaps the battle over EFCA will ultimately reveal the false premises upon which opposition to this law is based. While some companies, like Smithfield, have had to be dragged kicking and screaming into this new age, perhaps enough other companies will join labor in the effort to pass EFCA, or at least stay neutral, to enable this measure to be come law, thereby restore some health and balance to company-worker relations in this country, at long last.



Comments (2)

Yancey at You can learn basic employee rights

The EFCA is the single most important piece of employment legislation before Congress since the Emancipation Proclamation! The Employee Free Choice Act, "TO AT WIll" or "Not TO AT Will" that is the question! I believe the battle lines have been drawn between those who want to maintain an antiquated 19th century form of employment doctrine here in the 21st century.

At-will simply put means an employee can be fired at any time, for any reason or no reason. The employee can also fire the employer for any or no reason. If the employer fires you, your employment with that organization is over. The burden of proving your termination not being justified is on you! If you are employed At Will, your employer does not need good cause to fire you.

The Employee Free Choice Act by design creates a true partnership between employer and employee. In my view, "At Will" doctrine has spawned and reinforces an employment environment that is;

(1) adversarial by creating an "us versus them" in the American workplace employment mindset
(2) emboldens employers to maintain, sustain and perpetuate discriminatory employment practices
(3) monumentally wasteful of monetary resources and public goodwill in needless litigation

According to the language of the Employee Free Choice Act, it will:

(1) give employees greater liberty to form unions and establish employment contracts
(2) punish anti union employer retaliation and harassment
(3) compel employers to deal timely and honestly in negotiating contracts


I believe that elements of corporate America want to maintain an antiquated and out dated system of employment to preserve the ability to discriminate against certain groups and races. Here is the evidence to support that assertion.


In fiscal year 2007, 37.0% of all (EEOC) Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaints filed were race discrimination based. 30.1% were sex discrimination or gender discrimination based and national origin is 11.4%. The American workplace is comprised of the good, bad and the ugly as any other society in the world.

"At Will" employment is another dinosaur whose time has come for a decent burial.

JOE THE AVERAGE WORKER Author Profile Page:

Employee Free Choice Now . Org
Educating The World on The EFCA.

Myth vs. Reality: The REALITY is the Employee Free Choice Act Helps American Workers and their Families.

Despite the need for reform, critics of EFCA continue to misinform the public about the bill and hide the serious shortcomings of current labor law. Democrats are committed to setting the record straight and passing this important legislation on behalf of American workers and their families.

MYTH: EFCA will prevent the use of secret-ballot elections.

REALITY: EFCA does not strip workers of their right to choose a secret-ballot election to decide whether to select -- or not to select -- a union representative. EFCA simply gives workers the additional option of selecting a union representative by majority sign-up.

For More Information on EFCA please visit our website and blog

http://www.employeefreechoiceactnow.org

http://efcanow.blogspot.com/

Post your own comment

(To create links here or for style, you may wish to use HTML tags in your comments)


Our sponsors help us stay online to serve you. Thank you for doing your part! By using the specific links below to start any of your online shopping, you are making a tremendous difference. By using the links below, you are directly helping to support this community website:

Want to browse more blogs? Try our table of contents to find articles under specific topics or headings. Or you might find interesting entries by looking through the complete archives too. Stay around awhile. We're glad you're here.


Browse the Blogs!

You are here!

This page contains only one entry posted to Everyday Citizen on January 11, 2009 7:35 PM.

The blog post previous to it is titled "The Medical Malpractice Myth, by Tom Baker"

The post that follows this one is titled "Our New President Calls for Sacrifice"

Want to explore this site more?

Many more blog posts can be found on our Front Page or within our complete Archives.

Does a particular subject interest you?

You can easily search for blog posts under a specific topic by using our List of Categories.

Visit our friends!

Books You Might Like!

Notices & Policies

All of the Everyday Citizen authors are delighted you are here. We all hope that you come back often, leave us comments, and become an active part of our community. Welcome!

All of our contributing authors are credentialed by invitation only from the editor/publisher of EverydayCitizen.com. If you are visiting and are interested in writing here, please feel free to let us know.

For complete site policies, including privacy, see our Frequently Asked Questions. This site is designed, maintained, and owned by its publisher, Everyday Citizen Media. EverydayCitizen.com, The Everyday Citizen, everydaycitizens.com, and Everyday Citizen are trademarked names.

Each of the authors here retain their own copyrights for their original written works, original photographs and art works. Our authors also welcome and encourage readers to copy, reference or quote from the content of their blog postings, provided that the content reprints include obvious author or website attribution and/or links to their original postings, in accordance with this website's Creative Commons License.

Copyright, 2007-2009, All rights reserved, unless otherwise specified, first by each the respective authors of each of their own individual blogs and works, and then by the editor and publisher for any otherwise unreserved and all other content. Our editor primarily reviews blogs for spelling, grammar, punctuation and formatting and is not liable or responsible for the opinions expressed by individual authors. The opinions and accuracy of information in the individual blog posts on this site are the sole responsibility of each of the individual authors.