August 28, 2009

Toyota’s One Unionized Factory to Close

If there was ever any doubt that unions are injurious to workers and management, one need only look at what will happen to Toyota’s one unionized factory in Fremont, California, where the company makes the popular Corolla.

Toyota’s management voted yesterday to close its Fremont facility, which employees 4,700 workers. Atsushi Nimi, Toyota’s VP for North America, reported that “it would not be economically viable” to keep the factory operating. In other words, during the current economic slump, which has had a devastating effect on the auto industry, Toyota finds it far more profitable to operate its numerous non-union facilities in Alabama, Indiana, Kentucky, Texas, and West Virginia, where the UAW has not been able to organize pro-management employees.

Toyota will import Corollas manufactured in Canada and Japan. Economists believe that the closing of the Fremont facility will ultimately cost 40,000 jobs in the state.

Gary N. Chaison, a professor at Clark University, where he teaches labor relations, stated that factory’s unionized status probably sealed its fate, according to a report in The New York Times.

Once again, unions are proving to be a major obstacle to our economic recovery, especially for manufacturers who operate in heavily unionized states.

Comments (0)

August 20, 2009

Union Wrongs, Business Rights

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: Add new tag, cabot institute for labor relations, corporate America, labor department, management, National Labor Relations Board, organized labor, stephen cabot, union wrongs, unions, workers — Stephen J. Cabot @ 6:02 pm

Films and television shows often portray Big Business as villainous and unions as manifestations of pure virtue selflessly devoted to the needs of workers. However, based upon information compiled by Union Facts and the Bureau of National Affairs, unions have repeatedly committed acts that are injurious not just to non-union workers, but also to their own members. And those, of course, are the people whose interests unions supposedly represent and are charged with protecting.

One should also know that wrongful acts by unions far outnumber charges of unfair labor practices committed by management and alleged by those same unions. Such is the information issued by the National Labor Relations Board.

The NLRB report of 2005, for example, contained the following information:

Unions faced 6,381 allegations
82% of those charges alleged illegal restraint and coercion of employees by their unions.
By contrast, 53% of charges were against management and those were for a refusal to negotiate contracts.
Of all the listed allegations against unions, nearly 600 charges were based upon union discrimination against workers.
In the previous year, unions filed more than 100 complaints against other unions
Virtually every union in the United States, according to the Bureau of National Affairs, has had to defend itself against charges of violating union laws. And for some of those unions, the numbers of charges against them are in the thousands!

It’s time that the media and the current administration in Washington stop treating Corporate America as if it were a nefarious monster and start realizing that union leaders are not the altruistic and benevolent leaders that they pretend to be.

Comments (0)

August 14, 2009

The Power of One

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: Add new tag, cabot institute for labor relations, corporate America, labor department, National Labor Relations Board, organized labor, President Obama, pro-union, stephen cabot, stephen j cabot, union organizers, unionization, unions, washington, workers, workforce — Stephen J. Cabot @ 4:57 pm

Management and workers have long known that high levels of productivity are the result of good relations and of all parties working together to achieve positive goals. That, however, is not the underlying message of Executive Order 13496, which President Obama signed. Here is a sentence from that order: “The attainment of industrial peace is most easily achieved and workers’ productivity is enhanced when workers are well informed of their rights under the Federal labor laws, including the National Labor Relations Act.”

The Order is aimed at those who do business with the government, and it – in effect – guarantees that workers will know about all of their options when it comes to strikes, walkouts, and slow downs. The government has said that the order will provide labor peace. If that sounds unbelievable, it is. The government has handed organized labor another weapon to use against Corporate America.

How will informing workers of union tactics for securing their demands increase productivity? If it does anything, it will put Corporate America at a disadvantage when hiring workers for federal jobs. Not only will contractors have to abide with the Order, but so will their sub-contractors. Each will have to post all the information for their workers; and if it is not posted, delinquent contractors and sub-contractors will be barred from doing business with the government and be liable for various sanctions.

Actions taken against companies will be at the discretion of the Secretary of Labor, who is responsible for the enforcement of the Order. While the Secretary may exempt certain companies, the Secretary can also cancel contracts and prohibit future contracts with the government.

The Executive Order and the power invested in the office of Secretary of Labor is further evidence that the Obama administration is not only on the side of unions, but it is actively advancing union interests to the detriment of Corporate America.

Comments (0)

August 7, 2009

The Ongoing Saga of Union Corruption

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: Add new tag, cabot institute, cabot institute for labor relations, carpenters, corruption, employee free choice act, Employee Free Choice Act, organized labor, stephen cabot, stephen j cabot, unions. unionization, workers — Stephen J. Cabot @ 4:37 pm

The New York District Council of Carpenters and Joiners of America has had a sordid history. In 1990, federal officials attempted to remove mob influence within the union. In 1994, their efforts resulted in a consent decree that was followed by a court appointed corruption monitor. The New York Times has now reported that “federal authorities…announced new corruption charges on Wednesday against the union’s leader and nine other union officials and contractors. The charges include racketeering, bribery, fraud and perjury.”

A twenty-nine count indictment was issued, following a lengthy investigation by the FBI, the Department of Labor, and Manhattan prosecutors. It alleges that union officials accepted $1 million in bribes to permit contractors to pay below union scale benefits and hire non-union and illegal alien workers, and to forego payments to union benefit funds.

We were further reminded of union corruption this week when we learned of the death of Budd Schulberg, who wrote one of the greatest screenplays ever filmed about union corruption, On The Waterfront, starring Marlon Brando and Karl Malden, who also recently died.

With a pro-union administration in Washington and with the likely passage of the Employee Free Choice Act on the horizon, unions will again be in a position where they can take advantage of workers and corporations. It will be a lose-lose situation for everyone, except – of course – for the unions and their political enablers.

Comments (0)

July 31, 2009

EFCA’s Binding Arbitration: Down the Road to Ruin

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: Add new tag, cabot institute, cabot institute for labor relations, corporate America, employee free choice act, organized labor, pro-union, stephen j cabot, unions. unionization, washington — Stephen J. Cabot @ 3:58 pm

As we recently reported, the congress may remove card check from the Employee Free Choice Act, but it will still keep binding arbitration. With pro-union arbitrators making final decisions on union contracts, Corporate America will be facing one the most destructive challenges to collective bargaining.

If a company and union cannot come to an agreement, then a government appointed arbitrator will step in and make a decision for a first contract. In effect, someone who has little or no knowledge or experience about how a particular company is run will make a decision that will have far reaching financial consequences. This may have been exactly what organized labor wanted all along; in other words, card checks was a red herring, for binding arbitration will deliver precisely the results that unions want to obtain.

Binding arbitration may be used by a company and union to settle a specific individual dispute, but when it is used to determine an entire contract, the effects can be devastating. Salaries, wage and hour issues, medical insurance, length of paid vacations, seniority, could all be decided by a single arbitrator!

If Corporate America hopes to defeat the provision for binding arbitration in the Employee Free Choice Act, it must continue lobbying congress. If the unions succeed in making binding arbitration the focal point of the ACT, they will have set many companies on a fast-paced trip down a road to ruination.

Comments (0)

July 17, 2009

One Down, Four to Go: EFCA

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: Add new tag, cabot institute for labor relations, corporate America, employee free choice act, Employee Free Choice Act, labor relations, stephen cabot, union organizers, unionization, unions — Stephen J. Cabot @ 4:56 pm

This week, the U. S. Senate decided to eliminate card checks from its proposed Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). Unions will not be able to represent employees simply by getting them to sign cards expressing a desire to be represented by a union. This victory was won by the concerted efforts of Corporate America and all those who believe in the democratic principle of secret ballot elections.

The bad news is that a revised EFCA bill will call for a rapid time frame for new elections. Union elections would have to take place within a five to ten day period after 30% of workers had signed cards indicating that they want to be represented by a union. Current campaigns often run more than a month and often up to two months.

In addition, the revised bill would require that union organizers be permitted on company property.

As if that were not bad enough, the revised bill would also prevent management from requiring that workers attend anti-union, pro-management educational sessions.

Finally, the bill would contain a demand that employers, who fail to reach agreement on a contract with a new union, submit to binding arbitration. This, in effect, means that government agents will impose an agreement on managment, one which may be one sided and financially unsound.

The new bill will be voted on in September, so it is essential that Corporate America continue its vigorous lobbying efforts. It is also essential that Corporate America learns to deal effectively and proactively with the negative provisions of the revised bill before unions come calling on its workers.

Comments (0)

July 2, 2009

Financial Woes of Pro-Union States

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: Add new tag, congress, financials. organizers, non-union, pro-union, right to work, stephen cabot, union organizers, washington — Stephen J. Cabot @ 1:19 pm

The National Institute for Labor Relations Research (NILRR), a proponent of right-to-work policies, recently released a report that the demands of unions have greatly added to the financial woes of New York, California, and New Jersey. The Cabot Institute for Labor Relations has also been studying this phenomenon, and it concurs with the findings of the NILRR.

The percentage of unionized workers in those three states ranges from 20% to 27%, while the number of unionized workers in the rest of the country is between 12% and 13%. In the three heavily unionized states, workers receive the largest hourly wages in the country, and public-service employees receive the most generous pensions. For example, a retired police officer in Westchester county receives $200,000 a year and another in Suffolk county, New York, receives $100,000 a year. When one multiplies those numbers by the number of public-service retirees, many of whom retire in their mid-forties, it’s easy to understand why those three states are in such deep financial trouble.

When one compares job growth in right-to-work states where non-union auto makers have set up manufacturing facilities with a state, such as Michigan, home to domestic auto makers, the numbers are indeed startling. It is obvious that right-to-work states are enjoying far more robust employment figures than pro-union states. And because right-to-work states offer greater non-union employment opportunities than the big industrial states, the former states are in far better financial shape than New York, New Jersey, Michigan, and California.

Washington law makers, unfortunately, are intent on making it easier for unions to organize workers, and the results will be higher labor costs, greater unemployment, and more states in financial trouble.

Comments (0)

« Newer Posts