promotes democracy) 1. Strengthens penalties against companies that illegally coerce or intimidate employees in an effort to prevent them from forming a union; 2. Brings in a neutral third party to settle a contract when a company and a newly certified union cannot agree on a contract after three months; 3. Lets employees decide how to express their choice to organize, either by balloting or by majority sign-up, meaning that if a majority of the employees sign union-authorization cards, validated by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a company must recognize the union. (AFL-CIO Americas union movement)
revives the economy) unlike the corporate bailouts costing taxpayers, and future generations of Americans, hundreds of billions of dollars, the Employee Free Choice Act doesn't cost taxpayers a dime. For too long, big corporations have shunned these ideals and enriched themselves at the expense of America's working families. Today, the average CEO makes 344 times more than the average worker. So it is not surprising that CEOs and their Washington lobbyists oppose employee free choice. (Portland Press Herald)
Correct I asked for two advantages and disadvantages of the NRA, but I am asking for you to describe two advangates of the EFCA. Sorry about the confusion.
Since I'm writing neg, I refuse to brainstorm two positive ideas. Thus, I will refute how silly CJ's post is:
Let's start with this silly statement, "Unlike the corporate bailouts costing taxpayers, and future generations of Americans, hundreds of billions of dollars, the Employee Free Choice Act doesn't cost taxpayers a dime." The reason we've had some of these corporate bailouts is because of union groups. Look at GM, their union made that company go bankrupt and made it necessary to have the bailout. The EFCA would only worsen this.
Next, "Today, the average CEO makes 344 times more than the average worker." This is because the average CEO has worked HARD, has paid several thousands of dollars to go through college, and has earned their money. If you want to talk socialism CJ, this is socialism at its best.
Now his starting 3 statements: 1. I'll give you this one, stricter penalties are not necessarily a bad idea. However, there is no need for stricter penalties. 2. While a neutral third party coming in to save the day sounds good, when you look at what the bill actually says, it is awful. The bill requires mandatory arbitration. Arbitration is when a third party comes in and does not have to acknowledge either side's request or get the union and employer to agree. They get to pick what the agreement will be and it is binding by law and does not grant the ability for either side to appeal. 3. Now the biggest problem: eliminating the secret ballot. Not only is this anti-democratic but it is just foolish. Countless times in history Unions have threatened and intiminated employees to unionize. Even today when unions have the majority and then the employer requests a secret ballot we see that 60% of the unions don't form! wow! This shows the corruption of Unions. Elimating the secret ballot will undermine the purpose unions are supposed to work for, protecting the workers.
positives: -EFCA leads to better wages and benefits while making unionization the employee’s choice rather than the employer’s (zoufiles) -EFCA is critical to reducing poverty and bringing back the middle class (zoufiles)
Based upon President Obama's comments, as well as recent interviews with other elected EFCA supporters, here are my February 2009 predictions on EFCA passage:
The Obama Administration will do all it can, within the current structure of the NLRB and the NLRA, to make unionization easier.
If Unions can push EFCA through, they are committed to doing so. If it cannot be pushed through as it is and if a compromise on EFCA can be had, such as shortening the post-petition secret ballot election period, it will be considered and passed quickly. (I note though, that nothing in Section 9 of the NLRA currently requires a specific post-petition election time period before holding secret ballot elections)If no compromise is possible in the near term, Reid and Pelosi will still push for passage of EFCA as soon as they can muster the votes. Efforts by employers to put "your house in order" in the workplace are still critical: a) training of supervisors; b) lawfully-performed surveys of employees; c) evaluating and updating current employment policies and practices; and d) educating employees about union cards AND on what good benefits they have beyond their W-2 wages. There is still no solution to the constitutional or "takings" problem created by EFCA if the government is allowed to impose a collective bargaining agreement on an employer. Efforts to notify elected officials of your opposition to EFCA are still very important. http://www.dinslaw.com/will_efca_pass_change_is_coming_regardless/
The EFCA (Employee Freedom of Choice Act) would allow workers to immediately unionize a workplace where 50+% of the workers have signed union cards, a process known as "card check".
Employers and their front groups have waged a massive campaign against the EFCA in the mass media, claiming that it would eliminate secret ballots. This is not true: under the EFCA, while workers would no longer be required to hold a secret election after 50+% have signed union cards, they can still do so if they want to. But their employers would not have the power to require that they do so. They also fail to note that employers frequently abuse the election procedure, using it to buy time in which to fire workers likely to vote in favor of unionization and put other pressure on the workers against unionizing. The EFCA (Employee Freedom of Choice Act) would allow workers to immediately unionize a workplace where 50+% of the workers have signed union cards, a process known as "card check".
Employers and their front groups have waged a massive campaign against the EFCA in the mass media, claiming that it would eliminate secret ballots. This is not true: under the EFCA, while workers would no longer be required to hold a secret election after 50+% have signed union cards, they can still do so if they want to. But their employers would not have the power to require that they do so. They also fail to note that employers frequently abuse the election procedure, using it to buy time in which to fire workers likely to vote in favor of unionization and put other pressure on the workers against unionizing The EFCA (Employee Freedom of Choice Act) would allow workers to immediately unionize a workplace where 50+% of the workers have signed union cards, a process known as "card check".
of course reyna has something about obama on hers....lol hehe. but anyways..
1. The Wagner Act, also known as the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (29 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq.), is the most important piece of labor legislation enacted in U.S. history. It made the federal government the arbiter of employer-employee relations through the creation of the national labor relations board (NLRB)& recognized for the first time the right of workers to organize & bargain collectively with their employers. The act overturned decades of court decisions that asserted that labor unions violated an employee's liberty of contract. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/National+Labor+Relations+Act
2. The Wagner Act established the rights of employees 2 organize, join, or aid labor unions & 2 participate in collective bargaining through their representatives. The act also authorized unions 2 take "concerted action" for these purposes. This meant that workers could lawfully strike & take other peaceful action as a way of placing pressure on an employer. This provision was coupled with another that prohibited employers from engaging in unfair labor practices that interfere with the union rights of employees. Unfair labor practices include prohibiting employees from joining unions, firing employees b/c of their union membership, or establishing a company-dominated union. In addition 2 requiring employers to bargain col lectively with the union duly selected by the employees, the act set up procedures 4 establishing appropriate bargaining units (homoge neous groups of employees) where employees can elect a bargaining agent (a representative for labor negotiations) by a secret ballot.
The EFCA eliminates anti intimidation -Meaning that some companies have been know to fire employess that vote to have unions (A recent University of Illinois at Chicago Study) Under the law workers would have a free choice and fair chance to form a union.
is this not the same exact question you asked already this week? "Describe two advantages...of the National Labor Relations Act"... ????? hmmmm....
ReplyDeletepromotes democracy) 1. Strengthens penalties against companies that illegally coerce or intimidate employees in an effort to prevent them from forming a union;
ReplyDelete2. Brings in a neutral third party to settle a contract when a company and a newly certified union cannot agree on a contract after three months;
3. Lets employees decide how to express their choice to organize, either by balloting or by majority sign-up, meaning that if a majority of the employees sign union-authorization cards, validated by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a company must recognize the union.
(AFL-CIO Americas union movement)
revives the economy) unlike the corporate bailouts costing taxpayers, and future generations of Americans, hundreds of billions of dollars, the Employee Free Choice Act doesn't cost taxpayers a dime. For too long, big corporations have shunned these ideals and enriched themselves at the expense of America's working families. Today, the average CEO makes 344 times more than the average worker. So it is not surprising that CEOs and their Washington lobbyists oppose employee free choice. (Portland Press Herald)
Cassie,
ReplyDeleteCorrect I asked for two advantages and disadvantages of the NRA, but I am asking for you to describe two advangates of the EFCA. Sorry about the confusion.
Since I'm writing neg, I refuse to brainstorm two positive ideas. Thus, I will refute how silly CJ's post is:
ReplyDeleteLet's start with this silly statement, "Unlike the corporate bailouts costing taxpayers, and future generations of Americans, hundreds of billions of dollars, the Employee Free Choice Act doesn't cost taxpayers a dime." The reason we've had some of these corporate bailouts is because of union groups. Look at GM, their union made that company go bankrupt and made it necessary to have the bailout. The EFCA would only worsen this.
Next, "Today, the average CEO makes 344 times more than the average worker." This is because the average CEO has worked HARD, has paid several thousands of dollars to go through college, and has earned their money. If you want to talk socialism CJ, this is socialism at its best.
Now his starting 3 statements:
1. I'll give you this one, stricter penalties are not necessarily a bad idea. However, there is no need for stricter penalties.
2. While a neutral third party coming in to save the day sounds good, when you look at what the bill actually says, it is awful. The bill requires mandatory arbitration. Arbitration is when a third party comes in and does not have to acknowledge either side's request or get the union and employer to agree. They get to pick what the agreement will be and it is binding by law and does not grant the ability for either side to appeal.
3. Now the biggest problem: eliminating the secret ballot. Not only is this anti-democratic but it is just foolish. Countless times in history Unions have threatened and intiminated employees to unionize. Even today when unions have the majority and then the employer requests a secret ballot we see that 60% of the unions don't form! wow! This shows the corruption of Unions. Elimating the secret ballot will undermine the purpose unions are supposed to work for, protecting the workers.
And this is why the EFCA sucks Major pelotas
positives:
ReplyDelete-EFCA leads to better wages and benefits while making unionization the employee’s choice rather than the employer’s
(zoufiles)
-EFCA is critical to reducing poverty and bringing back the middle class
(zoufiles)
I full heartedly agree with the new hero but for the sake of my sanity i will find two advantages, they are as follows:
ReplyDeleteEFCA would eliminate the itimidation of employees behind closed doors
(The Atlanta Journal and Constitution)
Guarantee that workers who can choose collective bargaining are able to achieve a contract.
(AFL-CIO the american union movement)
Based upon President Obama's comments, as well as recent interviews with other elected EFCA supporters, here are my February 2009 predictions on EFCA passage:
ReplyDeleteThe Obama Administration will do all it can, within the current structure of the NLRB and the NLRA, to make unionization easier.
If Unions can push EFCA through, they are committed to doing so. If it cannot be pushed through as it is and if a compromise on EFCA can be had, such as shortening the post-petition secret ballot election period, it will be considered and passed quickly. (I note though, that nothing in Section 9 of the NLRA currently requires a specific post-petition election time period before holding secret ballot elections)If no compromise is possible in the near term, Reid and Pelosi will still push for passage of EFCA as soon as they can muster the votes.
Efforts by employers to put "your house in order" in the workplace are still critical: a) training of supervisors; b) lawfully-performed surveys of employees; c) evaluating and updating current employment policies and practices; and d) educating employees about union cards AND on what good benefits they have beyond their W-2 wages.
There is still no solution to the constitutional or "takings" problem created by EFCA if the government is allowed to impose a collective bargaining agreement on an employer.
Efforts to notify elected officials of your opposition to EFCA are still very important.
http://www.dinslaw.com/will_efca_pass_change_is_coming_regardless/
The EFCA (Employee Freedom of Choice Act) would allow workers to immediately unionize a workplace where 50+% of the workers have signed union cards, a process known as "card check".
Employers and their front groups have waged a massive campaign against the EFCA in the mass media, claiming that it would eliminate secret ballots. This is not true: under the EFCA, while workers would no longer be required to hold a secret election after 50+% have signed union cards, they can still do so if they want to. But their employers would not have the power to require that they do so. They also fail to note that employers frequently abuse the election procedure, using it to buy time in which to fire workers likely to vote in favor of unionization and put other pressure on the workers against unionizing.
The EFCA (Employee Freedom of Choice Act) would allow workers to immediately unionize a workplace where 50+% of the workers have signed union cards, a process known as "card check".
Employers and their front groups have waged a massive campaign against the EFCA in the mass media, claiming that it would eliminate secret ballots. This is not true: under the EFCA, while workers would no longer be required to hold a secret election after 50+% have signed union cards, they can still do so if they want to. But their employers would not have the power to require that they do so. They also fail to note that employers frequently abuse the election procedure, using it to buy time in which to fire workers likely to vote in favor of unionization and put other pressure on the workers against unionizing
The EFCA (Employee Freedom of Choice Act) would allow workers to immediately unionize a workplace where 50+% of the workers have signed union cards, a process known as "card check".
of course reyna has something about obama on hers....lol hehe.
ReplyDeletebut anyways..
1. The Wagner Act, also known as the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (29 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq.), is the most important piece of labor legislation enacted in U.S. history. It made the federal government the arbiter of employer-employee relations through the creation of the national labor relations board (NLRB)& recognized for the first time the right of workers to organize & bargain collectively with their employers. The act overturned decades of court decisions that asserted that labor unions violated an employee's liberty of contract.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/National+Labor+Relations+Act
2. The Wagner Act established the rights of employees 2 organize, join, or aid labor unions & 2 participate in collective bargaining through their representatives. The act also authorized unions 2 take "concerted action" for these purposes. This meant that workers could lawfully strike & take other peaceful action as a way of placing pressure on an employer. This provision was coupled with another that prohibited employers from engaging in unfair labor practices that interfere with the union rights of employees. Unfair labor practices include prohibiting employees from joining unions, firing employees b/c of their union membership, or establishing a company-dominated union. In addition 2 requiring employers to bargain col lectively with the union duly selected by the employees, the act set up procedures 4 establishing appropriate bargaining units (homoge neous groups of employees) where employees can elect a bargaining agent (a representative for labor negotiations) by a secret ballot.
The EFCA eliminates anti intimidation
ReplyDelete-Meaning that some companies have been know to fire employess that vote to have unions
(A recent University of Illinois at Chicago Study)
Under the law workers would have a free choice and fair chance to form a union.