Not only are unions pushing hard for the adoption of the Employee Free Choice Act, but union friendly state legislators are joining the battle as well.
In the Vermont state house, for example, Democrats carried the day for unions by passing a bill that waves the need for a union vote if a majority of workers sign representation cards.
Republicans worked hard to delay, alter, and defeat the bill, but their efforts were for naught.
Under the new law, Vermont state workers can become union members if 50% of their ranks sign cards asserting that they want to belong to a union.
One opponent of the legislation complained that the new law attempts to solve a workplace issue by denying workers the right to vote. It is, indeed, anti-democratic. It further opens the door to union intimidation, for a worker will not be able to make a clear-headed, reasonable decision with a union organizer standing in front of him with pen and card in hand, saying, “You must sign this card now.”
While the new law will apply to state workers, state colleges, and the University of Vermont, private industry believes that it, too, will shortly become vulnerable to the new law.
The battles are waging across the country, and unions are determined to win. Corporate America must learn to deal effectively and creatively if it is not be crushed by onerous union demands.
Toyota will open a new $1.3 billion manufacturing plant in 2010 in the town of Blue Springs, Mississippi. Why not Michigan? Because auto manufacturing plants in the Midwest operate with unionized workers whose representatives have a history of making onerous demands on management. Just look at GM: it spends more on union-negotiated health care and pension plans than it does to manufacture cars!
The facility in Blue Springs will be the first new auto manufacturing plant to open in the south since the 1980s. The addition of the new Toyota facility will further enhance the region’s reputation as the Southern Automotive Corridor, where none of the foreign-owned plants is unionized.
The economic benefits to the region will be several billion dollars, not only from Toyota, but also from a new Hyundai Motor Company plant in Montgomery.
The foreign-owned auto manufacturing plants are providing good-paying, non-union jobs as well as contributing sizeable tax revenues to the areas in which they operate. While the large Detroit companies (i.e., GM, Ford, and Chrysler) suffer one economic blow after another, the foreign-owned auto manufacturing plants in the south are providing ten of thousands of jobs, economic security, health and pension benefits, and all without union representation.
Anyone who wants to see the future of the US auto industry need only look at what is happening in the Southern Automotive Corridor.
In the small Maine town of Waterboro, the 13 town hall employees will vote next month on whether they should join a union. If they do, however, their salaries and benefits could exceed the town’s budget for 2007- 2008.
In an effort to stay within its budget and yet offer something to the employees, the town selectmen will offer the employees across the board raises.
That does not sit well with the Teamsters Union. Known for taking advantage of every opportunity, the Union has stated that the employees should not lock in salary increases until a vote on unionization has been taken. After all, the Teamsters Union is more concerned about increasing its membership roles than whether a town can meet its financial obligations.
Such short-sighted thinking had a disastrous effect on numerous industries, such as shipping, auto, and newspapers.
It will be a sad day when a small New England town either goes into bankruptcy or raise taxes on local residents just so it can meet the demands of the Teamsters.
For many years, it has been apparent to me and other pro-management attorneys that unions often exaggerate or hype their claims about management misdeeds. Now the Center for Union Facts has performed an analysis that confirms what I and others have long known.
For example, unions had claimed that 23 percent of union organizing efforts have resulted in employees being fired. It turns out that the figure is a mere 2 percent, and some of those employees may have been fired for entirely justified reasons.
Unions and their allies in the Congress have used the erroneous figure to justify voting in support of the mis-named Employee Free Choice Act, which obviates the democratic principle of secret ballot elections. Incidentally, it is ironic that the Congress would vote to abolish union voting.
Once again, unions are resorting to hype and exaggeration to make a point that is entirely fallacious.
Here from the Center of Union Facts are the unvarnished facts:
Percent of Unionization Campaigns where an Employee was Illegally Fired:
Year Percentage
2003 2.1
2004 2.3
2005 1.5
3-year Average 2.0