This is Republican crap. The Employee Free Choice Act is designed to give employees a collective voice to bargain with companies who have proven themselves to be opportunistic and greedy in their pursuit of profits. Everyone, including unions, are for healthy, profitable companies. The Employee Free Choice Act just makes it easier for workers to form unions so they’re not relegated to live in poverty while management lives in excess.
Kinder should spend his time trying to save the bike race, something everybody can get behind, instead of touting this union bashing garbage.

When Kinder tried to cultivate Black voters in St. Louis last Spring he stated:
“Families and individuals without healthcare are at risk each day. Solutions for many of their problems is offering affordable healthcare through private sector partnerships”.

Well, that means Kinder obviously opposes public healthcare.

Now he tours the Black Communities with the message…”If you get sick, you’re on your own. Don’t expect me to help with that “private sector” crap.

Union members are 67% more likely to have employer negotiated healthcare benefits.

more baloney from someone who hasn’t done any manual labor. this end around by the republicans is just a cover up and spin trying to keep things in their favor by denying access to workers by the unions. what a decietful play on words”save our secret ballot”. what a crock. “our” secret ballot. yeah, buddy. ole kinder and us have got to stick together on this. them scarey ole unions might want health care, living wage, safety concerns and all that un-business stuff.

I am getting so sick of the union pukes on this site. It’s never the unions it’s always buinesses fault. Give me a break nothing is one sided like your “shop steward” tells you. By the way you should all be afraid once the secret ballot is removed from anything! If the secret ballot is such a horrible thing why did the unions push for it decades ago to raise union memberships? Now numbers are dropping so they have to change the rules.

Good for Kinder and Loudon. My vote, for or against unionization (or during any other election for that matter) should be kept private. The one place I should never feel intimidated is in the voting booth.

If the “so-called” secret ballot is so important to these anti-union hoods, which is still easily available through EFCA, why not have free elections with the secret ballot process? The employers force employees to attend secret closed meetings where their anti-union rhetoric is spewed and threats of dislocating their workers is preached.

If Kinder, and his failed side-kick Loudon want a fair process, let the workers attend a series of forums where the union and management can openly debate the merits. Then the workers can vote a secret ballot after a fair and honest discussion….Isn’t that what our Founding Fathers intended when they formed our democracy Mr. Kinder? Isn’t that how we decided to elect you?

These “anti-worker” politicians should stop kissing the butts at the Chamber of Commerce under the pretense of helping working families.

Wage disparity nearly tripled under Bush and the Republicans since 2001.
Nearly 65% of workers polled by Time Magazine would favor a union if given a fair opportunity….The Save Our Secret Ballot initiative is as misleading as the 1978 “Right to Work” initiative which failed miserable under a secret ballot….

Let’s put EFCA on the Missouri ballot if you want a true representation of the peoples will…..We’ll show the Republican country-club set the real power of a secret ballot.

Instead, the Missouri Republicans will continue to try to exempt this state if Obama ever signs EFCA into law….So much for Republicans respecting majority rule under a secret ballot.

The reason unions want to get rid of secret ballots is so that they can use intimidation and peer pressure, if not outright violence, against individuals not wishing to unionize. If a secret ballot is good enough for electing the president, it’s good enough for unionizing. I hope that Kinder is successful on this issue and keeping the Tour of Missouri.

It is the unions that are bankrupting this country. They want more and more money and who do you think pays the ultimate price–the consumer. There is no reason autoworkers should be making $80.00 an hour. ANother example of a union being screwed up is the union at Busch Stadium for the concession stands; they represent the members about as much as an aardvark. Further the management practices reverse discrimination and discrimination against thos over 50 years old. THe management keeps paying off these investigators and the discrimination goes on and on and on

Just to clarify one thing to my pro and anti union friends. The Employee Free Choice Act does not eliminate the secret ballot. Rather it allows the employees to choose how they form their union. They can use a majority sign up process or can choose to have an election where a secret ballot will be used. All the Employee Free Choice Act would do is give the employees, not the employer, the choice. And seeing as how a union is an organization of employees, shouldn’t they have that choice?

As far as what Kinder and Loudon are doing. The Free Choice Act, if passed, would be federal law. No ballot proposal or Missouri law can superseed federal law. So Missourians might ask why their elected offical, Mr. Kinder, is spending all this time and money talking about something that he does not actually have any control over. This is just politics and is a huge waste of money and effort by Republicans to prove just how anti worker they really are.

Big Tall Dud….
The unions are bankrupting this country?
The unions represent 7% of the private workforce. Union wages are pumped back into the economy…unlike Victorian Masterpieces.

In 2003, Alice Walton bought a $78 million dollar Rembrandt. Just one of many in her collections which are proudly displayed in 14 seperate residences. Five Waltons consistantly make the Forbes Top Ten….In 2003, your tax dollars were used to pay $850 million in subsidized healthcare costs to Alice Walton’s employees.
That’s equal to 11 Rembrandts for Ms Walton, in exchange for an $850 million dollar debt passed to your children.

Who the hell needs unions?
Your kids.

Now, tell us again…How’s bankrupting this country.

Garrison, you are full of crock! Union organizers can promise ANYTHING and not be held liable. Employees have sooooo many regulations preventing any persuasion or colusion. What makes you think this anything but a ploy for more power and money???
You are most likely a union thug, excuse me, a union member yourself. Didn’t you just put Chrysler and GM out of business???

Promise anything? What..like a good faith effort to negotiate for healthcare? Maybe some vacation time?

If you don’t think employers intimadate the hell out of employees about unionizing during their so-called company meetings, you’re an idiot.

Did you really think the Bush labor department was going to cite Wal-Mart for conducting union bashing seminars during “safety meetings” for underpaid employees?

Wal-Mart was cited for 4,000 labor law violations under Clinton’s labor dept..
Less than 100 under Bush.

Do the math.

If I want to join a union in my workplace, it should be my private decision to vote to do so. I don’t want some pro-union thug leaning on me and my coworkers and threatening our health and well-being. And don’t think they wouldn’t do that either. I have to deal with many union contractors in my line of work, and I can tell you first hand some of the things they do, such as demanding that two electricians be present and $150/hr to stand and watch while we plug in equipment, ordering work stoppages if someone walks onto the site with a screwdriver and the wrong color hardhat, refusing equipment deliveries to the construction site by non-union shipping companies, and stealing and damaging equipment if they don’t get awarded a bid. Considering that the mafia is alive and well in the laborers’ unions and everyone knows it, don’t you think people would be intimidated and fearful to vote their true feelings in an open forum?

As an employee who has been subjected to union organizing efforts in the past, I can speak with experience on this issue.
Under the current process, when the pro-union folks show up agitating for union organization, I can say sure, I’ll sign that card - knowing that I am going to vote No in the secret ballot. When an over-bearing boss tell me “Your job is at stake if you support the union”, I can tell him, I understand his position - knowing that I am sure to vote “Yes” on the union organization. The union folks don’t know my vote, my boss doesn’t know my vote - I get to maintain my privacy and security.
Under the so-call “Employee Free Choice Act” - that privacy and security gets taken away. If I tell the union folks I won’t sign their card - they know immediately that I oppose the union, and I’m left subject to their ostracism and retaliation - and don’t even try to say that it doesn’t happen because I’ve seen it. If I sign the card, my name shows up on the list of union supporters, and the over-bearing boss knows it - leaving me subject to his acts of retaliation.
The only thing that protects the individual is the secret ballot - and it’s precisely because of this protection that the Union’s want to kill it - they aren’t interested in protecting the individual, they are interested in the group.

It takes 3 workers out of 10 employees to demand a secret ballot under EFCA.
If 10 employees can’t sit down after work and discuss this over a couple of beers, then they deserve substandard pay and government healthcare.

It’s all about money and power. They are looking to expand their base, get union dues, pay the leaders, and send more funds to the every growing government. A bunch of bullcrap!! I’ll keep my money and guns - you can keep your change.

Perhaps you are familiar with the Bill of Rights and have heard of the Freedom of Association? Do potential members of the Republican or Democratic Party, Lions Club, or members of the NRA have to vote in a secret ballot election? Obviously not, all they have to do is to sign a card stating they want to be a member. The supposedly secret ballot election has turned into a gauntlet designed to give the employer at least 45 days to intimidate and threaten their employees from exercising their constitutiional right to Freedom of Association. If employers are now willing to give employees representatives (unions) equal access on company property, equal time to counter the “captive” audience meetings mandatorily enforced by the employer, and agree not to fire employees for attempting to exercise their constitutional rights then this legislation would not be needed. Unfortunately, I don’t see the Chamber of Commerce and the other Big Business front groups agreeing to this. As a matter of fact, isn’t the chamber just a “union” of businesses? I wonder if the participating businesses has a secret ballot election? Could it be that they like their union but don’t want the average citizen to enjoy the same right?

Richard: so how would the employees decide whether they want a secret ballot or a card check? Would they “take a vote”? Would they get a secret ballot on that? Or not? The secret ballot and one vote per person are critical for preserving the rights of individuals in a free society.

Where is the “Freedom of Association” written in the Bill of Rights?

I am confused.

Kinder and Loudon are idiots! Why would you not want to help strengthen the Middle Class and help get the states unemployment numbers down by creating more Union jobs that are stable!

The conservatives and/or corporations are distorting this issue by heavily focusing on the secret ballot facet (i.e., Save Our Secret Ballot). The real reason they want to maintain secret ballot elections is because the elections have to be planned and scheduled. This gives a company time to browbeat its employees and put out propaganda, such as by making threats that the company will pack up and move somewhere else. With secret ballots safeguarded, people are more likely NOT to want to take a chance in joining a union. No, this issue isn’t about ensuring the anonymity of those voting; it’s about protecting the companies’ coffers. Kinder is just serving as a shill for the corporations. They’ve got him in their pocket.

Richard. You are an angry lad and have mistated the law. Clearly you are not a jurist although you speak with such authority as if you are one. Pity. What do you suppose federalism means? If federal law always superceded state laws then why have states? A Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing a civil protection in the ballot box is the privelege of the voters in that state to pass. Any lawyer worth his salt knows election laws are the purview of the states. Labor law is often but not always controlled by Congress. Please avoid putting your foot in your mouth Richard. It is not pretty.

Lets clarify a couple of things. Its not the WORKERS who decided whether to call for a secret ballot election, its the UNION. Nowhere in the card-check bill does it give the WORKERS the right to ask for a secret ballot, only the UNION. Secondly, the UNION only asks for the secret ballot election AFTER they have already been certified with 50%+ cards signed. So how many times, after they have already won, are they going to call for an election to see if the can win? ZERO. Imagine if this rule were in sports. On the final drive of the 4th quarter, if you come from behind and score the winning touchdown and win the game as time expires, you can then walk over to the official and tell them you want to replay the 4th quarter…..AFTER YOU HAVE ALREADY WON? Number of times you’ll do that? You guessed it: ZERO

Its very simple really. The question is why there is a ballot, in this case a card, with only one way to vote on it? Imagine if you went in to vote for President and only one of the two candidates was on it? Imagine if you went to vote for a ballot initiative in your state, and there was only a YES option. These ‘cards’ in the card check scenario need to have a YES and NO. The worker checks the one they want, signs it and its done. Dont bother my any more.

Theres been some very good journalism recently on one of the many reasons behind this union power grab, and it boils down to one primary factor: Pensions. One article I read said over 80% of the 100 largest unions in the country are ’substantially underfunded’ in their pensions, in large part due to the stock market collapse but also the unsustainable benefits they give retirees. They need millions of new members to provide dues to keep these pension funds going. Many of them are listed as ‘critical’, meaning they have less than 60% of what they need. This to me sounds like a Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme. Get new workers paying dues to then transfer over to their previous members. Dont fall for it.

While we’re all focusing on the loss of secret ballots and the intimidation sure to follow, the binding arbitration aspect of this bill is the one that I believe will truly kill millions of jobs. Imagine you own a small business, cafe or diner perhaps, and you barely clear a few thousand dollars a month in this tough economy. Now these are entry level jobs as you might imagine, $7-9 per hour. The union asks for $20 per hour, full health care and 3 weeks paid vacation a year, and you obviously, as a small business owner, refuse. If you dont sign on to this ridiculous contract after 4 months, an arbitrator can come and and impose it on you. Imagine that, in the country, having somebody come in and force a contract on a private business against the owners will. Even if the arbitrator splits the difference, you cant stay profitable with the new contract. So you have no choice but to close your doors before it bankrupts you. In this country? I cannot for the life of me believe that anyone, no matter how pro-union, would want this. I go to church, love it, but imagine if I tried to force people into my church and force them to pay 10% of their salary to the tithe. I would be against it. Everyone who is pro-union, this isnt the way to go about increasing union memmbership. No secret bellots and forced contracts, this isnt acceptable in any country, least of all ours.

There’s so many lies in some of these posts I’d never have time to unravel them all.

Let me ask you anti Employee Free Choice people something about intimidation? What if the employer schedules an election and sets the ballot box right in front of the bosses office? Every person that has to go vote has to do so under the watchful eye of the boss. Would that not be intimidation? What if the boss schedules the election on a Sat Morn to keep the voter turn out low? Is it ok for the company to fire anyone that is seen talking to a union leader?

“Theres been some very good journalism recently on one of the many reasons behind this union power grab, and it boils down to one primary factor: Pensions.” One article I read said over 80% of the 100 largest unions in the country are ’substantially underfunded’ in their pensions, in large part due to the stock market collapse but also the unsustainable benefits they give retirees. They need millions of new members to provide dues to keep these pension funds going. Many of them are listed as ‘critical’, meaning they have less than 60% of what they need. This to me sounds like a Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme. Get new workers paying dues to then transfer over to their previous members. Dont fall for it.
— Mike L

So Mike L your saying that union dues are used to fund pensions? Would you mind to post the link to the article you read?

BigTallDude, your a liar Autoworkers make no where near $80 per hour. Tell me how you feel about the $10 mil retirement package that Waggoner (fired CEO of GM) got and what effect that has on the “bottom line”? What about the $212 Mil. golden parachute that Nardelli (CEO of Chrysler) got when he left Home Depot? I guess it’s ok to rape and pillage a company if your a CEO but earn 30 bucks an hour and it’s your fault.

By the way, whats the excuse for Circuit City’s bankrupcty? They were not union. Who do you blame there? What about all the banks that went bankrupt not one of them were union.

I dont see any lies in these posts. The binding arbitrations posts are correct, the secret ballot elimination listings are correct. The only thing misleading at all the ridiculous name of this piece of legislation.

First, people here are trying to distinguish between a union and the workers. They are one in the same. Unions are simply organizations of workers. They elect officers, who are fellow workers, who help run the union.

Second, workers will continue to have the option of a secret ballot or majority sign up. A previous poster is probably right that if they get over 50% to sign cards, why would they opt for an election. But the important point is that it is THEIR choice. Why should an employer be the only one who has the right to either voluntarily recognize the union after 50% + 1 sign cards or call for election. That makes no sense. This just gives the workers the choice that currently only the employer has.

Third, to Mr. Towers. As I understand the Free Choice Act, it would amend the National Labor Relations Act. This is federal law and can not be changed or overruled by states. You are right that states have the right to set laws regarding elections. But despite the efforts of Mr. Loudon, anyone worth his salt knows that union elections are not the same as public elections. Public employees likely will be affected by Loudon’s efforts, as there is not a federal law such as NLRA that guarantees them a process for certifying a collective bargaining representative. Maybe I am wrong, maybe you are, but there will certainly be lawsuits that will sort it all out.

Thats kind of the point, the dangerous belief that unions and workers are one in the same. Theyre not. Once again, the previous poster is correct, the UNION NOT THE WORKERS has to ask for an election after they have already won, which they will NEVER DO! Imagine there are 20 workers and 11 were bullied into signing cards. At what point do the workers get a chance to ask for an election? They are all in a room and everyone is scared to speak out because the union guys, who are COMPLETELY SEPARATE AND DIFFERENT FROM THE WORKERS, outnumber the workers. And there’s nothing in the act (I downloaded and read it) that says THE UNION HAS TO LISTEN TO THE WORKERS. Its completely the union, not the workers, option and it will NEVER HAPPEN. There’s absolutely no choice for the workers here. Just putting the name ’choice’ in the idiotic title of this bill doesnt give choice. Its like calling a law that has madatory 1 year sentencing for a DUI ’The Prisoner Choice in Sentencing Law’ and saying it gives the prisoner a choice. This is the most anti-worker law ever considered by congress. No wonder moderate dems by the boatload (spectre, lincoln, pryor, landrieu, nelson) are running from this like the plague.

I agree with Jason Jr. The union is a completely separate entity that seems to think they know better than the workers. There’s so many easy ways to modify this bill if we truly want worker protection. I’ve been on 2 juries in the past and when we voted we had an agreement that if even 1 juror requested a secret ballot, then we would do it. Just put in a paragraph in the bill that says on the card there is a signature part and a check box where if even 1 worker checks it then a secret ballot election is required. Of course union guys wont support this. Saying you support the worker and actually doing it are two different things. If my company ever goes thru this, I want a secret ballot, and THATS NOT A PRIVELEGE, THATS MY RIGHT AND IT WONT BE TAKE FROM ME!

http://thetruthaboutefca.com/2009/07/15/abc-member-how-employee-free-choice-act-would-harm-my-business/

Union officers are paid according to the wages and benefits the negotiate for their members. It’s based on an hourly rate. To assume an increase in dues paying members will increase the pay for union officers is completely wrong. Organizing new members strengthen the membership and gives more responsiblity for the union to provide representation. When the IBEW in St. Louis increased membership by 1000, the union hired two additional business reps. The president of the union can’t just grant himself a $10 million dollar bonus like the other side of the table so frequently does.

I like to hear all the ditto-heads claim the UAW sank the auto industry. The UAW built the auto industry in this country and for 60 years their wages built our middle-class while making CEO’s billionaires.
In 1998, GM CEO Waggoner claimed, “No matter how high gas prices go, people will always by SUV’s”. Brilliant management. That comment alone is worth Waggoner’s $130 million dollar packgage.

PS…The highest paid union offical in America is Richard Trumka. He’s paid a whopping $240,000.

Ever consider what UNIONS want is to bring this country out of the depths of corporate greed and help a struggling middle-class?……NAaaaaaaa.

Unregulated, Republican Sponsored Corporate Capitalism has created a two class society. The Burgeoise and the Proliteriate. And the foolish Limbaugh crowd continues to call Organized Labor Unions the Communists.

Good luck to your grandchildren. Let’s hope God forgives you idiots.

I dont see any lies in these posts. The binding arbitrations posts are correct, the secret ballot elimination listings are correct. The only thing misleading at all the ridiculous name of this piece of legislation.

— Jesse
8:09 am July 15th, 2009

*The Employee Free Choice Act does not eliminate the Secret Ballot. I ask anyone here to post the actual language from the bill that says it does.

*Autoworkers do NOT make $80 per hour. If you can prove they do earn that then post the link that proves it.

* “such as demanding that two electricians be present and $150/hr to stand and watch while we plug in equipment, ordering work stoppages if someone walks onto the site with a screwdriver and the wrong color hardhat,”— cjstl
2:20 pm July 14th, 2009 Name the work stoppages, and what color of hardhat is required to be on the job? Your full of HOOEY cjstl.

*The workers are the union. The leadership’s wages are based on the union’s constitution and the only time a union official can get a raise is when there is a vote to change the constitution.

*pensions are NOT funded by union dues. Pensions are negotiated with companies. Many times members will not take a raise on their pay checks so that they can have their pensions funded.

*if 30% of the employees request a secret ballot then one shall be granted. The union would have to abide by the requests of the employees.

Not one of you anti-union people out there addressed my questions about company intimidation. If you don’t think it goes on it does. Every organizing campaign.

The secret ballot can only be requested by the UNION, not the employees. Thats not an opinion, thats a fact. There is nothing in the bill that says the employees have ANY SAY AT ALL in the vote, just the union. Fact, on pensions, getting additional companies unionized means additional funds flowing into the pensions, aka a ‘Ponzi Scheme’. The secret ballot in this bill is about as effective as the right to vote for blacks in the deep south in the 1950’s. Its a false claim. You could say they had the right to vote, but they didnt. You can say this bill gives workers the right to a secret ballot - it doesnt.

why dont we just do elections for unions at the same place where we do public elections? We just have the union and the employer split the cost of renting the local election facility, hire the same people who do election work every November, and then everybody can just show up anytime during the day and vote. No intimidation whatsoever. There cant be any objections to that. If it works in presidential elections, it will work for this.

I forgot to add, nobody from the company or union would be allowed on or in the election grounds. Only those people voting would be able to enter. And this ‘card’ would of course be more like a ballot, wouldnt make a lot of sense if all you could vote was ‘Yes’, now would it?

Bubba…I appreciate your posts.
We’re preaching to a handful of unemployed angry white conservative men who are incapable of understanding the logistics of a labor based economy. Their medium incomes are probably below $30K [when they're working] because they lack the basic essential job skills. Most of their limited political knowledge is from the media talking heads and hate radio.

I hire union electricians. I got my start in the IBEW. An employee told me he believes in the union movement, but we can’t all have high wages and great benefits. As a skilled union craftsman he makes a great income, outstanding benefits, and will retire with dignity. As a skilled employee, he’s provided me with the same. He once told me if everyone made $28-$35/hr., he wouldn’t be living in Chesterfield….There’s some truth to that statement. I shrill when I read the [right-wing] anti-worker posts on this site and I wonder who would hires these people?

So, when the anti-union hacks start spewing their ignorance remember….. it’s to their demise and to our gain. I hope you’re still with the UAW or find union employment soon.

PS. IBEW 1 sent a $5,000 check from our Members Voluntary Fund to UAW 136 Members Relief Fund.

It wasnt $80 per hour, it was always in the mid $70s range, and that was pay and benefits combined, and that was BEFORE the 2007 contracts that lowered it substantially and introduced the 2-tier wage system. The gap is not as great now. http://www.freep.com/article/20070722/COL06/707220658/

Voting in private isnt anti or pro union. I just want to vote in private, not if others want to, always. When I vote every november like 100 millio other americans, I shouldnt have to say ‘if 50% of them want to vote it private, then I’ll be allowed to’. Regardless of what everyone else wants, I expect, as an American, to go into a booth, in complete privacy, and make my decision without intimidation. Not if a majority of other people want that, always. There should never be an instance where I can’t vote in private. I might vote for the union or against it, thats not really the point. But my decision must always be in private and without anyone knowing how I voted. In the last election in my hometown, I voted against a bond issue for parks and recreation on the ballot that my wife really wanted to pass. I didnt have to tell her how I voted, why should I have to tell anyone else? Please dont try to make me pro or anti union. I’m ambivelant. But my vote must be in private

Martin,
The vast majority of voting decisions made by Boards of Directors, Municiple Leagues, County Councils, City Alderman, State Legislators, Labor Unions, and even the PTA, are made by unanimous recognition. That means a show of hands, a voice vote Yea/Na, or even dividing into sub-groups or caucuses. You’re living in an idealistic dream world.

At local union meetings the members vote on a variety of issues. Some supported by elected union officers and some not supported by officers.
Of course we’re always hearing about the horror stories of union management breaking the knees of members who disagree with them…Don’t we?
After all, that’s what the anti-union knuckleheads want you to believe.

I understand that, but issues that are fundemental privacy issues have to be decided in private, for or against. Most of the issues youre talking about are executing public business. A city councilman has to vote in public because he’s voting on public business and his consituents have a right to know how he voted because he’s casting their vote for them. On a personal issue of whether to join an orginization, the voter cant feel pressure for or against. We wouldnt have a showing of hands to say ‘Obama’ or ‘Mccain’. Thats a personal decision. We listen to arguments from both sides, then decide. I have no right to know anyone elses feelings on unions. I didnt tell a single person at work who I voted for last november, and I didnt ask anyone how they voted. I am in absolute agreement that there should be zero intimidation in voting for or agaist a union, but as I see the items in this bill, are we actually saying this is the only or even best way? How about a quick election, monitored, equal time for union and boss, then everyone votes from home by website, phone, mail, whatever. Its private and you dont have even tell any how, or even if, you voted. All employees given one day off to do it from home and nobody gets to know if I even voted, so I can walk into work the next day and say ‘Yeah, I voted’ and nobody knows if I did or didnt. I’m from a GM family, some Pontiac Motors and some GMC truck and bus in Pontiac Michigan. Some union some management, so I’m kind of on the fence. My issue is that I’m hearing that card check is the only/best option. And I dont see that. If I were subject to a union drive, I’d listen and would consider it. All I ask, as an intelligent person, is let me vote in private, from home would be best, by mail, phone, whatever, and I will vote my conscience. Why cant we just do that? who decided that this card thing was the ONLY solution?

Martin,
Join the union, let the union negotiate an agreeable contract with management, if you don’t like the extra pay and benefits…you can vote against the collective agreement on a secret ballot provided by your union.

What do you have to lose?
Unless your boss threatens to fire you for joining the union.
Which is illegal.

And that is an option, but even if I decide thats the route to go, it goes back to the basics, I need to do it in private and I have no intention of telling anyone (besides my wife) how I voted and I wont ask anyone how they voted. thats the prinicple at stake here. I’m concerned from a process standpoint too. We elect people to go to washington and work thru problems to find the best solution. It seems like this bill was introduced with some pretty controversial provisions and the sponsors are saying ‘no changes whatsoever’, take it or leave it. Thats not the way our country is supposed to work. When rational citizens have concerns about a piece of legislation, these concerns are supposed to be addressed before the bill is voted on. Rational people have concerns here, I want my representatives to address these concerns and it seems like theyre not being allowed to. Doest matter whether its the Patriot act after 9/11, the vote to authorize force in Irag in 2003, I expect my reps to be allowed to change a bill to address concerns. This card check option is only 1 of many ways to address the issue of intimidation. To me at least, there are many better options which i could support. It may be a moot point anyway. If I’m reading correctly, there are now about 5-7 different democrats in the senate who have said they wont vote for it in its current form, like lincoln from AR, Fenstein from CA, Spectre from PA, Nelson from CO, MAYBE Pryor form AR and Landrieu from LA (theyve hinted at pulling support but havent outright daid it). So it sounds like all the back and forth on whether the card check option is good or bad may be for not. It will have to be drastically re-worked to get it to even an up or down vote. I say, schedue a paid day off for all the voting workers, Fedex to their homes on that day off a user ID and password, let them log onto a labor relations board website from home or a public library, and vote in the privacy of your own home. No one, not a single person, company or union, would even know if you voted and if you did, wouldnt know how. Complete privacy and zero intimidation. I think if that were put into the bill, you would get almost unanimous support, not just in congress, but from the public as a whole

I understand and respect your opinion.

Martin,
Your proposal (quick vote) has actually been proposed and is being resisted fiercly by the chamber of commerce and allies. Why do you think that is?
I am still a believer in card check because business, not unions, have been repeatably proven to violate laws without punishment. People on here talk about union intimidation, but have no studies to prove it. There are numerous studies that prove company intimidation.
Then again, I wouldn’t mind voting for anything in public, so maybe you and I are just different.