LaborPains.org

After weeks of avoiding questions regarding her role in co-sponsoring “The Employee Free Choice Act”, Sen. Mary Landrieu finally answered the question: “Do you support a worker’s right to a secret ballot election when unionizing the workplace?” Her answer: she’s for a “fair process”.

One might wonder of Sen. Landrieu’s definition of a “fair process” is taking away an employee’s fundamental right to a private ballot vote. In fact, 58% of Louisianians oppose taking away a private ballot vote when it comes to unionizing the workplace. Even union members agree. Nearly half of Louisiana’s union households oppose changing the way unions are formed.

In her answer she also said that ‘this (EFCA) is a big issue we’re going to debate.’ We can only hope that in the coming months Sen. Landrieu will be open to such a debate and stop ducking questions from concerned citizens.

Recently, the issue of the Employee Free Choice Act was raised on the Lars Larson show heard statewide on 15 stations and in over 30 communities here in Oregon. While Lars was out that day, guest host Rob Kremer was more than up to the task of calling out Jeff Merkley on his support of this deceptively-named piece of legislation, calling it a “travesty”.

Some other quotes from Rob Kremer from the radio spot:

“It’s ridiculous to think they (unions and Merkley) are taking away the secret ballot in union elections.”

“This (card check) lays it open to unbelievable intimidation and manipulation.”

“I find it highly ironic that democrats, “Big D” democrats, care so little about the “little d” democratic process that they are OK with getting rid of the secret ballot when people are deciding something that will impact their workplace.”

“I can’t imagine the argument that says that we need to take away a secret ballot.”

Neither can 94% of Oregonians, Rob, but Mr. Merkley still supports this legislation because the union bosses who are contributing heavily to his campaign want him to support it.

Let’s just hope that Oregonians remember whose pocket Mr. Merkley is in when it’s time to vote in November.

Listen to the clip here

Senator Orrin Hatch and Home Depot founder Bernie Marcus discussed the impact of EFCA on CNBC. Here is how blogger Nick Osinki described it:

On CNBC this morning, they were interviewing the founders of Home Depot and they put it very bluntly. To paraphrase, they explained that this bill, if passed, would mean that a union could become certified and then install arbitrators that would set the wage rates for the company. Notice, that management did not enter into this equation. Could you imagine what this could mean for some companies? Could you imagine being a fledgling business, struggling to survive against your larger incumbent competitors, and learning that your employees just certified a union and that you would now be told what to pay your employees? This is exactly the issue at hand and it deserves far greater attention than what is currently getting.

Fortunately, it appears as though there are more than a couple of organizations ramping-up advertising campaigns to educate the public about the bill and its consequences. The fact is that this has already passed the house and only remains to pass the Senate before becoming law.

In Minnesota, we now know that two out of three candidates for the United States Senate oppose EFCA.  Dean Barkley, the Independence Party candidate, joins Republican Norm Coleman in opposing this misguided legislation.

Barkley gives a refreshingly clear and straightforward answer about the issue.

Proponents of the deceptively-named Employee Free Choice Act have finally realized their position is indefensible and are trying a different approach. Rather than engage workers with thoughtful issue-oriented analysis, they are feeding the self-proclaimed “Obama Girl” rote talking points in this clip:

I think I’ll see if I can get Paris Hilton on the record on the pitfalls of EFCA…

This report comes from a volunteer for Granite Staters for Employee Freedom:

Crazy story – today I attended the Rochester NHDP office opening. I stood there quietly with my video camera off and in my pocket, and didn’t say a word throughout the entire event. When things wrapped up, I took out my camera and went towards Representative Carol Shea-Porter. Her staff told me I had to step outside or they’d call the police. Before doing this, they told me I had to turn off my camera or she wouldn’t speak to me, so I did. We stepped outside – the office is their private property and I respect that – and I told the staffer (I think the New Hampshire Democratic Party communications director) that I wanted to ask my representative a question about why she supports card check voting over private ballots. The staffer said, “While I’m around, you will never ask Carol Shea-Porter a question.” I said, “So you’re telling me that I can’t ask my representative a question?” “Never.” She replied.

So again, it seems that the Democrats of New Hampshire are so afraid of discussing their untenable position on the EFCA that they are willing to threaten and coerce their own constituents.

Here is Paul Carmouche’s response when interviewed on his stance toward the Employee Free Choice Act, which he is assumed to support. Carmouche is the Democratic candidate for Louisiana’s 4th Congressional District.

Mr. Carmouche states, “I was taught as a youngster in school that the majority rules, uh, so I’m going to have to look at that and see that uh, when, when uh, uh… and I’m not sure about the ballots, and the secret ballots, but uh, if a majority of workers want to have a union, then the majority probably should rule.”

While repeating that the majority should rule (which hopefully is undisputed in the mind of any candidate), he doesn’t differentiate between whether that rule should be determined by a show of hands or by writing votes on gum wrappers.

The important thing we’d like for our candidates to support is privacy in a voting booth.  The Louisianians for Employee Freedom would prefer a candidate who would simply and resolutely answer “Yes” to that fundamental question.  (“Do you support an employee’s right to a secret ballot vote when unionizing in a workplace?”)

He ends by saying, “I’m going to look at those issues and I think you’re going to find that the decision that I come to is going to be a reasonable decision.”

Don’t be surprised if his “reasonable decision” happens to be perfectly in line with the will of the union bosses who have been funneling so much money into Democratic campaigns.

It’s clear from our most recent encounter with Al Franken that he, like Ashwin Madia and Elwyn Tinklenberg, has received the same union-provided talking points on how to handle the issue.  Their answers, even their body language, is just eerily similar.

 1.     When asked about your support for taking away the private ballot, suggest a follow up meeting which you never intend to hold.

2.     If the “meeting” ploy doesn’t work, immediately level baseless charges of “intimidation” even though you don’t have any proof.

3.     Finally, all evidence to the contrary, simply deny that EFCA takes away any rights from Minnesota workers.  If you say it enough times, people might actually believe that a union organizer intimidating a worker into signing a card is just as good as a private ballot election.

4.     No matter how many times your handlers try and pull you away, keep coming back, because you MUST have the last word, even if you don’t know what you’re talking about.