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.