The Washington Times is reporting on more details of the possible retail store “Card Check” compromise that Brian Faughnan wrote of yesterday, and the details of this one are definitely more palatable than the proposal presented in the Wall Street Journal. The plan being offered by the retailers preserves more than the secret ballot:
Their compromise would reject the card check method of voting and keep secret-ballot voting as it is now practiced in most instances. The compromise would also eliminate the union-backed provision that would force the settlement of certification disputes through mandatory arbitration.
To assuage the unions, the plan would for the first time permit union organizers to press their cases at work sites and would also prevent long delays before a union certification vote must be held.
…which, as Ed Morrissey notes, is much more likely to pass the Senate than the current version. In fact, the current version is not likely to pass the Senate at all.
This doesn’t mean that this is a good result, of course. There are a variety of ways that a shortened delay time and more on-site activism can be – and will be – abused by Big Labor. But it is the result that occurs when both Houses of Congress and the Presidency are held by a political party that is heavily pro-labor union management (note the precise designation there)… if you’re lucky. Not to belabor (hah!) the point, but elections have consequences – and as has been noted before, the cavalry is not coming over the hill. In other words, the proper response to Congress not giving you satisfaction on this issue is to go make sure that there’s a better Congress after the next election.
You start here.
Moe Lane
Crossposted to Moe Lane.
Moe Lane
Neil Stevens
Steve Maley
Dan McLaughlin
Isn't it all wrong?
10ksnooker (Diary) Sunday, March 22nd at 2:03PM EST (link)Why do Conservatives always fall into the trap of “gee this isn’t so bad, I guess I can support that”
So tell me, why can’t any company that wants to form unions right now. No reason actually, the employees just don’t want the union crapola.
The premise of this whole issue is wrong. Do nothing is best. Nothing is needed done.
Not so sure about that 10K, for three reasons
Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Sunday, March 22nd at 2:05PM EST (link)The large dem congressional majorities
The major damage to the economy anything like the original proposals would cause.
And the imperfect system we have now.
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
58 Democrats in the Senate, 255 Democrats in the House, and the Democrat in the White House disagree.
Moe Lane (Diary) Sunday, March 22nd at 2:13PM EST (link)And the best way to counter their opinion is to get one of the relevant numbers down to 49, 217, or zero.
The Kim Kardashian of blogging.
Check out my blog at http://moelane.com/.
http://moelane.com/filthy-lucre-filthy-lucre/
http://twitter.com/moelane
My (combined) wish list.
At worst partly wrong, maybe not wrong at all
gensec (Diary) Sunday, March 22nd at 6:04PM EST (link)There were two main reasons for objecting to Card Check. The most ardent and popular objection was its undemocratic removal of the secret ballot, and only secondarily that it would result in more unionization.
Of course for supporters of Card Check, more unionization was the whole point, while small ‘d’ democracy doesn’t have much inherent value for many capital ‘D’ Democrats (at least when democracy reaches the “wrong” outcome).
The proposal in the linked article does sound basically democratic, possibly more democratic that the current system depending on how much employers game the system with delayed elections and redefining the voter pool. Thus this proposal fully satisfies the main objection of most Card Check opponents.
For those who opposed Card Check because it would lead to more unionization, this proposal is indeed a compromise, worse than the current system. It will result in more unionization than now, but only where the majority of workers in a secret ballot want a union. It will result in less unionization than Card Check, because that unionizes some sites where a majority of workers really don’t want a union.
For me the undemocratic nature of Card Check, with its invitation for intimidation, was the overwhelming objection. So I’m basically OK with this idea (depending on implementation details, not spelled out in the article).
I also think unions are generally a bad idea, labor cartels that distorts the market the same way as an other anti-competitive collusion between suppliers. In principle, antitrust law should apply to unions like any other cartel. However the vast majority of Americans disagree with me on this, whether or not they personally want to be in a union. We’re not going to win any battles fighting to limit the right of workers to democratically choose to unions.
Wal Mart isn't waiting until 2010 or 2012.
The_Rebel (Diary) Sunday, March 22nd at 2:51PM EST (link)They’re going on the offensive now and putting their money where their mouth is. I’ll bet their gun sales are up sharply, too. You paying attention, union thugs?
I think the compromise was the plan all along
weave (Diary) Sunday, March 22nd at 10:00PM EST (link)The card check idea was such a ludicrous idea I think it was just floated out there in order to force a compromise such as this.
Oldest negotiating trick in the book. Make your first offer absolutely ridiculous so you can retreat a bit and make the other party feel good about it, even though they are still being had.
Card Check "compromise" is just the usual Liberal "Incremental-ism" ploy....
JLenardDetroit (Diary) Monday, March 23rd at 2:24AM EST (link)They “settle” to get it passed at 70% + 1 and then in a year (or after the 2010 Election) they then change the law down to 50% as planned all along – and there are STILL folks dumb enough to fall for this ploy/tactic EVERY TIME!!!!
Further, it would not surprise me other idiots (read: companies willing to “support” Card Check now) that feel they have some “unwritten agreement” (read: BACKROOM DEAL) with the “Unions” that they will go easy on them and/or not “target” them….. To whom I say – YOU PEOPLE ARE ABSOLUTE MORONS THAT HAVE (AND WILL NEVER) LEARN!!!!! The main target, of course – as we all know, is Wal-Mart! They are just the beginning and all the Fool companies that don’t grasp that this is just “incremental-ism” and you will be targeted TOO eventually deserves the hardship you’ll eventually see – THE PROBLEM, of course, is that WE ALL will have to suffer (not just those companies) for their Folly!
A Deal with the Devil, is NO DEAL!
Regards from NoMoTown (the MOTORlessCITY)
“Liberals, looking to do for? America what they’ve done for? Detroit! which is DESTROY IT!”
“I think, therefore I am Conservative”
“Conservative by choice, Republican by necessity”
“You can lead a Liberal to the Truth/Facts, but you cannot make them THINK!”
“Romney [No, not my first choice] does NOT have a MORMON problem. He has a, far too many Americans; these days; are MORONS problem!”
Follow @JLenardDetroit
(RS:Help) (JLD) (Hollyweird) (Brain-deads) (SPIN-cycle) (Obamaocare) (Party of kNOw) (Conservatism) (TEApeats) (respectful) (message) (Warning: Children Will Die!!)
Heil “O” Hell No Obamao is NOT MY PRESIDENT! “No U won’t”
I want “O” to FAIL (here, here, & whole Diary (Ofail) here, is why)
“The first Liberal was Satan” – a Rush caller (other Quotes)