3100 Companies, Including Wal-Mart, Sign Letter To Congress Opposing EFCA
Over 3000 members of the nearly three million-member strong Chamber of Commerce have sent a letter (PDF) to Congress expressing "strong opposition to the Employee Free Choice Act."
EFCA has three provisions, each of which we oppose. The first provision would require union recognition based on authorization cards signed by a majority of employees. This provision would allow organizing to be conducted in secret, would effectively eliminate the secret ballot election, and would hinder or even eliminate an employer's ability to tell its side of the story and correct misleading union rhetoric. Card check recognition also would effectively disenfranchise employees who oppose unionization and, as courts have repeatedly recognized, is inherently less reliable than traditional election processes for determining whether employees wish to have union representation.That's just about every provision of the bill.The second provision would enable a union seeking a first contract to require the
employer to enter into binding interest arbitration if a collective bargaining agreement were not reached within as little as 130 days....
The third provision would significantly increase penalties on employers for certain
violations of labor laws.
On the one hand, 3100 signatories represents a very, very small percentage of the Chamber's members. On the other hand, there are a lot of big names on this list, including General Electric and, crucially, Wal-Mart. And there's little doubt that the business community is pulling out all the stops on EFCA.
On the third hand, the letter itself runs one page, and the list of signatories goes on for 30 more. And that strikes me as a huge waste of paper.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Wow! Wal-Mart opposes a union-friendly bill? Who would have guessed?
Know what else I found out today --water is wet! Wa-hoo!!
May 14, 2009 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, so refreshing to see that now the corporate masters are the ones scrambling to sign petitions and writing letters to congress. It's like, it's like...
It's like individual people matter as much as they do now.
May 14, 2009 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
1 page letter with 30 pages of sigs.
Just like the wacko petition I got from WorldNetDaily complaining that I hadn't done my constitutional duty as an Elector to verify Obama's birth certificate. 4000 names attached.
I'll say the same thing now that I said then: If you'd ever shown the slightest interest in the law, I might listen.
As it is, F**K YOU.
May 14, 2009 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
That was swell of them to put their names on a big list for us. It's so much easier to know who to boycott when I can carry a list around with me.
Thank you, scumbags.
May 14, 2009 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
It looks like they padded that list a bit. I noticed there was an MD that signed. I guess he's worried about his receptionist starting a union. I don't think it really makes sense for a company to have a half dozen or so of its branches in other countries signing as individual companies, either.
May 14, 2009 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only problem with the bill is that it gives WalMart as many as 130 days - it should be 60-
More importantly - here's a solution: no one campaigns on company time - not the union and not the company - everyone campaigns after hours offsite - its called a level playing field - if the union can't call a meeting at 11 in the morning then neither can the company!
last but not least, exactly how is this undemocratic - a majority signs the card and you are a union - a majority votes in an election and you have a union. Seems that its still a majority to form a union either way and if you aren't interested in a union and you are in the minority after the card check or a secret ballot you still get a union.
May 14, 2009 10:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank God! I thought I was going to have to be responsible for putting together the list of companies to boycott!
May 14, 2009 10:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I still say that the Democrats are giving a propaganda gift to our enemies on this one. Union strongholds might back this, but union membership isn't what it used to be, and most American workers see a secret ballot as a GOOD thing.
And let's be honest, shall we? Unions want this because they know that people won't want to admit to their strongly pro-union co-workers that they'd vote against a union. Cards are simply a way of applying pro-union pressure (which can't be done with a secret ballot). Everyone knows this. Let's not be coy and try to pretend that there's any other reason for this provision. So it's very clear why the Democrats are getting killed in the propaganda war.
This is simply shooting ourselves in the foot. Well, Democrats are very good at that, it seems. Whenever we get some power, I guess we like to sabotage ourselves to give the GOP a chance again.
May 15, 2009 8:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
"This is simply shooting ourselves in the foot. Well, Democrats are very good at that, it seems". And Republicans aren't? I don't think you can limit self-inflicted wounds to Dems anymore.
May 15, 2009 9:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
How very concern-trolly of you to be so worried about how this might affect the Democratic party. Which chamber of commerce do you work for again?
May 15, 2009 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think this a done deal, this is our cost for the outcome of the last election , our country's price for electing liberal ,socialist change. Union's dumping almost a billion dollars into the last election , and this is payback. Yes, we bailed out the auto industry, now the UAW owens 55% of chrysler, and EFCA will now bail out the starving unions across the country, and watch ,watch this goverment give aid to YRC, and bail out the teamsters. Well you know what, if EFCA passes, and an addition 25% to 30% is tacked onto companies bottom line, to cover the union fatcats, who do you think will be paying for this? How much are you willing to pay for a Big Mac ?
May 15, 2009 9:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Spoken like someone who either has bought into the arguments of the union-busting corporate overseers or is hoping he can get others to.
May 15, 2009 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
The price hikes are not to cover the union fatcats, it's to cover the bloated over-paid management so they can still rake in the big bucks and then have to pay decent wages and benefits to their employees. If the G**D*** management wouldn't be so greedy everyone would be able to get a fair shake. Employees would be able to afford the necessities of life and have decent healthcare. But no, management thinks they deserve the outrageous salaries for ruining the company and sitting on their fat asses while the employees work their butts off.
If management would lower their salaries to a reasonable level and pay their employees a decent living wage, price hikes would be avoided.
It's the management's greed that raises the prices, not the fair wages that all employees are entitled to.
By the way, I wouldn't mind paying a little more for a product if I knew that the employees were being treated fairly. I would mind if I knew that management rakes in huge salaries but their employees are struggling to make ends meet.
May 15, 2009 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed, thank you for the list. I found a company I was considering doing business with. Not anymore.
I am in Wisconsin and find, what I think to be, an inordinate number of state business I recognize on the list. Is Wisconsin a hot bed for EFCA opposition, a concentration of misinformation or did CoC target certain areas?
Anyone else notice concentrations of businesses?
May 15, 2009 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
FedUp, I notice a fair few Michigan companies as well. Perhaps they targeted the Midwest?
Also, I thought it was interesting that Aurora Health Care of Kenosha is a signatory, rather than Aurora generally. Aurora is huge, so I'd be more impressed if the mothership signed. So maybe this list indicated that support is not as solid (or well-organized) as they'd like us to think.
May 15, 2009 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink