Employee Free Choice Act

[Sam Spade]

Would absolutely kill small businesses in this country - that's the primary reason why I'm against it.

The effect on larger corporations could be somewhat counter-intuitive, since they generally have the money to affect their own coercion tactics on workers who wish to unionize.

Depends on the small business. If they treat their employees like cogs in a machine, they will attempt to unionize. If they treat them with respect and decency, they won't. Giving them extra incentive to do the latter is a good thing in my opinion.

You assume that small businessmen are stupid.  If they see the legislation pass, the first thing they will do is lay off all *non-essential* workers (before they can unionize or something like that), and recalculate the amount they can afford to spend on payrolls.  Then, if they have to deal with unionization, they have the ability to.  In other words, maybe better paying jobs, but quite fewer numbers of them.

It will also continue to push businesses and people into states with a weaker union presence.  If the union presence follows, see step 1.  I think illegals will naturally become a smaller part of the workforce in the future.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In other words, if there's no secret ballot, do you somehow think that only unions will be influencing workers concerning the card check?

Not to mention all this strengthens the mafia enormously, but that's to be expected.

[Nym90]

Would absolutely kill small businesses in this country - that's the primary reason why I'm against it.

The effect on larger corporations could be somewhat counter-intuitive, since they generally have the money to affect their own coercion tactics on workers who wish to unionize.

Depends on the small business. If they treat their employees like cogs in a machine, they will attempt to unionize. If they treat them with respect and decency, they won't. Giving them extra incentive to do the latter is a good thing in my opinion.

You assume that small businessmen are stupid.  If they see the legislation pass, the first thing they will do is lay off all *non-essential* workers (before they can unionize or something like that), and recalculate the amount they can afford to spend on payrolls.  Then, if they have to deal with unionization, they have the ability to.  In other words, maybe better paying jobs, but quite fewer numbers of them.

It will also continue to push businesses and people into states with a weaker union presence.  If the union presence follows, see step 1.  I think illegals will naturally become a smaller part of the workforce in the future.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In other words, if there's no secret ballot, do you somehow think that only unions will be influencing workers concerning the card check?

Not to mention all this strengthens the mafia enormously, but that's to be expected.

Well, if they are well run businesses they probably have few if any non-essential employees now....would seem to me they would already want to be optimizing profits by laying these people off and saving the money if it's possible to do so without harming quality of the product. So actually I'm assuming they are smart (if we equate smart business practices with maximizing that particular company's short term profits....obviously that's a whole 'nother thread altogether) and thus already running as lean of an operation as they reasonably can.

And yes, of course both sides would advocate for their short-term interests in the vote to unionize. I fail to see how just letting businesses have their way without a system of checks and balances makes things better overall, but I guess that's where we'll have to agree to disagree.

I don't agree that it would increase the influence of the mafia overall, as they have plenty of pull in lots of businesses too. Weakening RICO and money laundering laws would certainly do that, but luckily I don't see anyone advocating for such at the moment. I would certainly support vigorous prosecution of any such organization that has mob connections, union or corporate.

[Firefly]

This is the bill I'm most looking forward to if the Democrats gain a filibuster-proof majority.  The bill does a lot more than just establish the card check as a legal and sufficient method for establishing a union.  It also severely increases the penalties (they're pitiful now) against employers who fire, discriminate against, or threaten workers who try to organize.  It even allows for temporary restraining orders in some cases.  It will finally give us Southern workers a chance to organize if we so choose without fear of reprisals from our employers.

[Person Man]

This is the bill I'm most looking forward to if the Democrats gain a filibuster-proof majority.  The bill does a lot more than just establish the card check as a legal and sufficient method for establishing a union.  It also severely increases the penalties (they're pitiful now) against employers who fire, discriminate against, or threaten workers who try to organize.  It even allows for temporary restraining orders in some cases.  It will finally give us Southern workers a chance to organize if we so choose without fear of reprisals from our employers.

Yes. I really don't understand why people are freaking out about the fact that it will be illegal for employers to stop their employees from unionizing by lying to them about having to fire them because the union made the business impossible.

Businesses should have to be forced to adapt to new hardships...the Government should stop selling itself to the latfundii.

[MODU]

Businesses should have to be forced to adapt to new hardships...the Government should stop selling itself to the latfundii.

[A18]

"Employee free choice" would presumably mean that each employee decides for himself whether to join a union. Of course, that is not what this legislation provides for; its plain and obvious intention is to enhance the coercive privileges of unions.

The current system enhances the coercive privileges of businesses.

By way of?