What Happened In Canada? (Reason 2,436 Why We Need EFCA)

Hey Alex,

“An arbitrator has imposed a contract on a Wal-Mart Canada Corp. store in Quebec that the company says preserves the status quo for wages and benefits.”

Alright!!, there is a union in a Canadian Wal-Mart, but, what does that “preserves the status quo for wages and benefits.” mean?  Does that mean the workers DON’T get a raise in wages and benefits?  Oh, I remember, now they DO get to PAY union dues for what they had for FREE before!!

Be careful what you WISH for, you just might not like it, once you get it!!

If having a union contract is not the piece of cake the union and the works expect it to be, WHY is corporate America so AFRAID of the Employee Free Choice Act?????????????

The only thing I can think of is those CEOs are VERY afraid that paying their workers more is going to cut into their exobatant salaries.  They may have to sell a corporate jet or too to pay for those worker raises.

‘WHY is corporate America so AFRAID of the Employee Free Choice Act?????????????”

It’s the union interferrence in management decisions that companies don’t like!!  It’s things like when a company has 2 people doing a job and the union says they need 4 people to do it!! 

As for the EFCA, they don’t like the idea, that ‘former employees’ can help get the union in!!  If an employee signs a ‘check card’, it isn’t disgarded if the employee quits!!

“paying their workers more”

What part of ‘Status Quo’ don’t you understand?

What part of ‘Status Quo’ don’t I understand?

Are companies like AIG and GM and their tax payer handouts part of your ‘Status Quo’ ?  They seem to be now.

WAKE UP SLEEPY HEAD!  CORPORATE GREED IS BANKRUPTING THIS COUNTRY!  UNDERMINING THE SECURITY OF INOCENT AMERICANS. 

IF EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE CAN LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD BETWEEN CORPORATE EXCESS AND GREED THEN IT NEEDS TO BE SUPPORTED.

Well let’s not forget some of our other greedy corporate bastards…
Washingington Mutual
Coutrywide Mortgates
Merril Lynch
Lehmann Brothers
Goldman Sach
Bank Of America

Those wonderful upstanding corporations don’t want any interferrence in their management decisions.  But they have both of their hands out streched in Washington DC looking to for a TAXPAYER hand out for their greedy mistakes.

YES, RDS LET’S NOT INTERFERE IN THEIR MANAGMENT DECISIONS!  LETS JUST GIVE THEM BILLIONS IN HANDOUTS AND TRUST THEM!

Wal-Mart workers in St. Saint Hyacinthe, Quebec just received a union contract? That’s great news, but don’t expect it to last! Wal-Mart will find a way to break this contract, or get rid of the union.

Don’t think for one minute that the largest and sleeziest retailer in the world will bargain with a union! They will find a way to pay their employees the same poverty wages as before, and leave them with little or no benefits. If they cannot succeed in doing that they will do what they have already done in Canada. THEY WILL JUST CLOSE THE STORE.

Wal-Mart BARGAINS WITH NOBODY. You either play by their rules or you don’t get to play at all.

I agree with Jane’s comments.  BUT, at least it is a victory, an a step in the right direction.  Closing the store might have some ramifications. Quebec is a country within a country (Canada).
The real victory will be in Saskatchewan, birthplace of the Canadian Socialist Movement in Canada ( 1950’s), and still going strong.
Wages will be in the top five bargaining points, BUT sloppy management, and grievence preceedure for hourly associates, must be at the top of the list.  Unlike the United States, health care issues are not a prime importance, other than dental coverage.
Canadians, will be having second thoughts if Wal-Mart starts closing stores, the Anti American business practices advocates will have a field day!!!

jane your favorite stores are more sleazier than wm has ever been.you are too stupid jane to realize that a union is just there for dues mkoney and could care less about wm workers well being.trust me i am an ex ufcw union worker and former teamster union member.how about the sleazebag unions jane that dont stand up for workers at the bottom end and have the arrogant attitude that layoffs have to be done by seniority and only seniority.jane the ufcw wont do crap for wm workers.trust me i am an ex ufcw union member and that union never did squat for me.

i still working on my GED

MATT IN in MATT IN in gresham,oregon

“i still working on my GED”

We all know that you’re not “MAT” because “our MAT” can’t spell GED.

EX-CEO,

“Are companies like AIG and GM and their tax payer handouts part of your ‘Status Quo’ ?  They seem to be now.”

Seems to me, that GM already HAS a union (UAW), how did that STOP GM from seeking a taxpayer handout?

As for those others you mentioned, I don’t see that the EFCA will affect them much, because most of their employees get paid well to begin with!!

Jane,

“They will find a way to pay their employees the same poverty wages as before, and leave them with little or no benefits.”

Did you READ the story above?

‘An arbitrator has imposed a contract on a Wal-Mart Canada Corp. store in Quebec that the company says preserves the status quo for wages and benefits.’

The arbitrator ‘imposed the contract’, to keep the wages and benefits the SAME!! 

I find it strange, that YOU and others continue to LIE, by saying that Wal-Mart pays ‘poverty wages’, when that is not TRUE (see link below), and claim their benefits are ‘little to no’, when their benefits are MORE than a lot of other places give!!  You decide in your mind, what you would LIKE the wages and benefits to be, and then decide, that because they are NOT what you would like to see, they then MUST be ‘little to no’!!  Try comparing the wages and benefits to other LIKE businesses, instead of ‘Dreaming’ up fantasy ‘wages and benefits’!!

http://www.livingwage.geog.psu.edu/

I believe that Wal-Mart should continue to get tax payer subsidies and handouts to pay for the poverty living conditions that Wal-Mart’s shitty wages barely pay for. Wal-Mart deserves subsidies from the government because I think it is right but only as long as there is no CEO personal responsibility or accounting for it and nobody finds out about it. Wal-Mart throws their people under the bus for healthcare while other companies are socially responsible. I am the libertarian claim to responsibility around here defending Wal-Mart and all their shitty behaviors for profits while screwing over people in America.

If an employee signs a ‘check card’, it isn’t disgarded if the employee quits!!

You left out the most important part, RDS. The part that scares Wal-Mart to death.

If an employee signs a ‘check card’, it isn’t disgarded if the employee quits or is fired!

Imagine if every Wal-Mart employee fired for trying to unionize still got to vote.

What’s good for Wal-Mart is BAD for America!

Ken V,

“Imagine if every Wal-Mart employee fired for trying to unionize still got to vote.”

WHAT ‘VOTE’?  Under EFCA, there is no vote, unless the employees ASK for one!!

WHAT ‘VOTE’?

and....

...it isn’t disgarded...

Once again, RDS, your comments sound contradictory and confused. What else is new?

The whole history of the world is the story of the struggle between the selfish and the unselfish. All that’s bad around us is bred by selfishness. Sometimes selfishness can even get to be a cause, an organized force, even a government and then it’s called fascism. ~ Paul Verrall (William Holden) Born Yesterday

Ken V,

“Once again, RDS, your comments sound contradictory and confused. What else is new? “

Well, let me make it ‘simpler’ for you, okay?  When I say “vote’, I mean a ‘secret ballot’ vote of PRESENT employees!!  And, ‘it isn’t disregarded’ means, that once a ‘check card’ is signed, it will continued to be counted, even if the employee who signed it, is no longer with the company!!  Therefore, with Wal-Mart’s turnover, it could be possible to get 51% cards signed and at that point only have 1% of those who signed cards still employed by Wal-Mart!!

“The whole history of the world is the story of the struggle between the selfish and the unselfish. All that’s bad around us is bred by selfishness.”

That depends on what you call ‘selfishness’!!  Is it ‘selfish’ to work hard and want to keep the fruits of your labor or is it ‘selfish’ for a person to want what others have, even though they haven’t worked for it?  Just because a person or company doesn’t choose to ‘give away’ the things they have (because you think they should), doesn’t make them ‘selfish’!!

If you have 2 cars and your neighbor has none, are you being ‘selfish’ if you don’t give him one of yours?

RDS-

“Alright!!, there is a union in a Canadian Wal-Mart, but, what does that “preserves the status quo for wages and benefits.” mean?  Does that mean the workers DON’T get a raise in wages and benefits?  Oh, I remember, now they DO get to PAY union dues for what they had for FREE before!!”

You must not be counting the $.30/hr raise imposed this year and the $.30/hr raise imposed next April.  As well as a written grievance procedure, and better working conditions.  If the average employee is making $10/hr. that is a 3% raise.  I wonder what the average raise for Walmart employees was this year. 

The wage increases were dues “offsets” meaning they make the same money, no loss for dues, got better working conditions (health and safety advantages), yearend bonuses, and a union contract which is good for two years.  You have to start someplace.  Considering that they have a contract and didn’t have to give up anything I would say that is a good start.

Health and safety advantages are big.  They can actually make money for Walmart AND the employees.  Union work sites are safer.  There will be less lost time for the company and more time on the job for the employee.

How about the fact that the union was certified in January 2005 and are just now getting a contract.  This is what the workers (not just Walmart but every employee looking to form a union) are up against here that it trying to be rectified with EFCA.  The companies have all the power to delay recognizing and negotiating with a recognized representing union.

As far as the insurance companies and banks (AIG, Skank of America, and Shitty Bank)…

“As for those others you mentioned, I don’t see that the EFCA will affect them much, because most of their employees get paid well to begin with!!”

THEN WHY ARE THEY SPENDING MILLIONS OF BAILOUT MONEY FIGHTING EFCA!!!!!!

Jane-

“Wal-Mart BARGAINS WITH NOBODY. You either play by their rules or you don’t get to play at all.”

You are going to find out that Canada with a 20% union membership national average, is a completly different scenario than the U.S.  And their Labor laws are actually enforced.

RDS

“WHAT ‘VOTE’?  Under EFCA, there is no vote, unless the employees ASK for one!!”

So now the employees don’t get a vote, he says.

What the hell is a card check? If they raised their hands, that would be a vote. How about a verbal vote? You know “All in favor say I, all opposed say nay” is that not a vote?

WHAT A MORON YOU SRE BOB!

P.S. Are you in need of a new key board? Does your period not work? Does your keyboard stick when you use the apostrophe?

<i>Washingington Mutual
Coutrywide Mortgates
Merril Lynch
Lehmann Brothers
Goldman Sach
Bank Of America<>

And he only got 4 out of 5 of ‘em spelled correctly!

Some ex-CEO...sounds more like a “Big D Special”, to me…

bbrd

“Some ex-CEO...sounds more like a “Big D Special”, to me…”

Unlike you (someone) and others on this and many other sites I don’t find it necessary to blog using several I.D.’s. When you read my post’s you can feel fairly sure that I wrote it. Unless some yahoo post’s using MY handle, In which case, I’ll be sure and let you know.

Big D,

“What the hell is a card check? If they raised their hands, that would be a vote.”

That would be fine, if the employees were actually there to raise their hands!!  With the card check, you can sign a ‘card’ and then quit and your card would still be counted as a ‘vote’ for the union to obtain the 51%!!  With a ‘ballot vote’, ONLY present employees are counted, not FORMER ones!!

It is not surprising RDS that this week finds you typically drowning in the ‘selfishness and relativity’ sewer trying to make Judas and WalMart appear valid and proud of the insane practice of ruthlessness against people for money. The WalMart temple worship you traffic in RDS is little different than the whorehouse Caiaphas ran.

WalMart- You can have your ‘bonus’ as long as you spend it here at WalMart. Oligarchic ‘free market’ corporate capitalism brought to you by the ‘love of money’ psychopaths of Bentonville against economic conscription wage slaves.

RDS

So what are you saying, that a signing a card is not a form of voting? And the only reason that there are so many people replaced between the time that the cards are signed and the union is certified is because of stall tactics used by the company. If the secret ballet were done in a fair and timely manner we would not be having this argument now.

The truth is WM only wants a “secret” ballot because they can bully, scare, and if that doesn’t work fire or pressure into quitting any of the pro union workers.

Besides your argument is that those that quit or were fired should not get their votes counted is BULL SHIT! Using your logic, if an election for Gov. of a state were held today and it took 10 weeks to certify that election, and then everyone that died or moved out of state from the voting date to the certification date should not count

Big D you are full of crap!!!!

Union Organizers: “John we need you to sign this card authorizing the union”

John the employee:  “But I don’t want to sign”

UO: “But we will keep harrassing you until you do sign”

John:  “I don’t want to sign”

UO: “If you don’t sign we will use you as a the poster child for our cause and mock you in front of you fellow employees, friends and family”

John: “But you can’t do that”

UO:  “Yes we can, just watch us.  We will make your life a living hell and the EFCA gives us that right.”

Yep.... EFCA.... or better said EZFCO (Employee ZERO Free Choice Act).

If “card check” and “raising your hand in support” were so good I see no reason why all political elections are not held that way as well.  Try that out on the american public and see how far you get.

EFCA, for all in tense and purposes, WILL ELIMINATE the secret ballot from the NLRB process.  This is all about what’s best for the unions and no one else.

Joe in-

“UO:  “Yes we can, just watch us.  We will make your life a living hell and the EFCA gives us that right.” “

Care to point out <i>EXACTLY<i> where in the EFCA Bill (I will accept either the House or the Senate version) that right is given.

You are all missing the point…

THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT IS NOT FOR ANY INTEREST EXCEPT THE EMPLOYEE.  WAS NEVER INTENDED FOR ANYONE ELSE. 

EFCA comes down to what is best for the employees, period.  Forget the business owners, they aren’t even part of the equation.

Wal-mart you as full of it as Big D.  Either that you’re incredibly nieve, dumb and/or ignorant to the realities.  Do you truly believe that there will not be any intimidation by union organizers and fellow employees in order to obtain authorization cards?  Really??????

Wal-Mart the NLRB was created soley for the employees by providing secret ballot elections to LET THEM choose whether they want union representation or not. 

The EFCA has NOTHING..... I REPEAT NOTHING to do with what’s best for employees.  The EFCA for all in tense and purpose ELIMINATES the right to secret ballot elections for employees and puts their livelyhood in the hands of union organizations.  Why do you think unions are fighting (and paying for in campaign contributions) so strongly for its enactment?  It means HUGE $$$$$$ for their pockets.

I’ll ask you again, if “card check” is such a good idea then why don’t we implement it in political elections?  If it’s so great for employees then “card check” must be great for the voting american public right?

JOe, you’re full of SHIT!!!!

“vote (vt)
n.
1.
a. A formal expression of preference for a candidate for office or for a proposed resolution of an issue.
b. A means by which such a preference is made known, such as a raised hand or a marked ballot.
2. The number of votes cast in an election or to resolve an issue: a heavy vote in favor of the bill.
3. A group of voters alike in some way: the Black vote; the rural vote.
4. The act or process of voting: took a vote on the issue.
5. The result of an election or referendum.
6. The right to participate as a voter; suffrage.
v. vot·ed, vot·ing, votes
v.intr.”

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/vote

I don’t see anything that says that an election has to be a secret ballot election for it to be legal. This is a workplace election no a government election.

The fact is EFCA does give the right for the EMPLOYEE to choose weather or not they want a secret ballot election. The KEY here is it leaves it up to the EMPLOYEE’S NOT THE COMPANY to make that choice.

The companies want the “secret” ballot so that they can stall the election process. Fire, intimidate, and threaten pro-union employees. The companies use this “stalled” time to get rid of potential union sympathizers and water down the up coming vote.

The “secret” ballot is only secret to the employees. The company knows through a net work of union busting teams, spies and surveillance who the pro-union people are. There is NOTHING secret about this type of “secret ballot”.

BTW JOe, why not come clean, you could care less about the rights of the workers. If you did, you would stand up for the employee’s right to make the choice, not the company. Go shed your crocodile tears somewhere else.

Big D, I certainly care more for employees rights than you do.  The only thing you care about is pro-union.  The only thing you care about is stripping employees of their right to privacy and freedom of speech.  To hell with what the employees want.  The EFCA, in it’s present form, does a complete disservice for employees.  It puts TOTAL control of union organization in the hands of union execs.

The employees will effectively lose any right to a secret ballot election if and when they are intimidated into signing a card.  And don’t give me crap about how “card check” is the only thing needed to show union authorization and that “card check” tells us how employees truly feel about unionization.  Because if that were the case today then please explain to everyone how unions can get over 50% of the petition signage today but somehow they continue to fail miserably when they can’t sustain that approval through an NLRB secret ballot election.  With the pro-union organizing, spies and surveillance used by the unions even they don’t know how people vote so how does a company?  Do you know who Michelle and Barack Obama voted for in this past general election for president?

And I’ll ask you the same question I asked Wal-mart.  If “card check” or even “show of hands” is such a good way to handle votes then why don’t we see that in political elections?  Why don’t our elected officials try it out on themselves first to show the world how great the process is?

“I certainly care more for employee’s rights than you do.”

Then where is your OUTRAGE when a company fires employees for trying to unionize? If you are so concerned about the workers rights, where’s your outrage about the companies using ILLEGAL union busting techniques. If you care so deeply, as you state, where’s your outrage about the companies when they stall the vote, sometimes for years. Where’s your outrage when the companies use intimidation in the work place to try to stop the workers from forming a union.

The fact is you have no outrage at those things. You could care less about the workers rights. All you care about is stopping the workers from unionizing. That’s it plain and simple!!!! 

I have NEVER heard of an employee being fired by an organizer for not signing a card. I have on the other hand heard of the company firing workers for trying to exercise their LEGAL right to organize, and this happens all the time.

“Because if that were the case today then please explain to everyone how unions can get over 50% of the petition signage today but somehow they continue to fail miserably when they can’t sustain that approval through an NLRB secret ballot election.”

I just went through the reasons but here it is again. The company stalls elections (sometimes for years), the company then fires, pressures into quitting, promoted into management (at least till after the election, then they are usually let go for some trumped up reason) so they can’t vote, and waters down the vote. THAT’S WHY!!!!

If the secret ballot vote were done in a timely and honest manor and not stalled by the companies we wouldn’t be having this as an issue now.

You and I both know that the “secret ballot” is just a tool for the company to keep the union out through intimidation, firings, and other illegal tactics!

What you fail to talk about is the fact that the employees have the CHOICE of a card check or a secret ballot. The majority rules, and that’s as it should be.

JOe, you are a fraud and a coward.

At least with bbrd (someone) and RDS they are honest about their disdain for working people. You on the other hand are a LIAR and you are a COWARD, Hidding behind the guise of being pro-labor and on the side of the working man, your facade as some kind of “justice for the people spokesman”, Is a joke and everyone sees that JOe has no clothes. And everyone is laughing at you JOe, we can all see that you, JOe, have NO BALLS!

How pathetic you are, you angry “little man”

Big D,

“Using your logic, if an election for Gov. of a state were held today and it took 10 weeks to certify that election, and then everyone that died or moved out of state from the voting date to the certification date should not count”

And, here’s the problem with YOUR logic!!  You said that it took 10 weeks to certify the election, but only votes on the DAY of election are counted!!  In the ‘card check’, the election TIME, is based on how long it takes to get 51% cards signed and if most employees DON’T want the union, it might take years!!  Let’s say that it took 3 years and 40% of those 51% no longer work for the company, does that represent the WISHES of the PRESENT employees?

“The KEY here is it leaves it up to the EMPLOYEE’S NOT THE COMPANY to make that choice.”

That would be fine, if it was only present employees making the choice!!  I would be fine with the ‘card check’ if it was limited to a ‘1 week’ card signing period!!  One week should be plenty enough time to cover all employees!!  And, if they can’t get 51% in that one week, it would mean that the employees DON’T want the union!!  An open-ended card signing period, means that they are having a hard time getting people to sign and the tactics JOe mentioned would evolve!!

“Then where is your OUTRAGE when a company fires employees for trying to unionize?”

Under the present system, all employees trying to unionize have to do, is register with the NLRB as ‘employee organizers’ and as such, can’t be fired without just cause!!

“At least with bbrd (someone) and RDS they are honest about their disdain for working people.”

That is where you are patently WRONG, I and my wife were working people for over 40 years, my daughter and grandson are working people and my relatives and friends are working people, so, I do NOT have distain for working people!!  I am all for a ‘fair’ chance for workers to DECIDE whether they want a union or not!!  Taking the votes of FORMER employees as being the WISHES of the PRESENT employees, is just WRONG!!  After all, it’s the PRESENT employees who have to pay the dues and live with the contract, not the former employees!!

“The company stalls elections (sometimes for years)”

So, you DON’T condone the company STALLING elections, but you think it’s alright for the union to STALL the election for years, right?  Like I said, I would favor a 1 week card sign up period and a “secret ballot’ election within the second week!!  Make an EFCA like that and I would be all for it!!

RDS

You know that getting cards signed is a long drawn out process. The company fights the organizers at every turn, they don’t give access to the employees, they don’t provide list’s of the employees names. They shuffle people around so nobody ever knows who works for the company except for management, and they aint telling.

The only way that you could have that kind of time frame is if it were mandatory for the employees to attend meetings, as they are required to attend anti-union meetings for the company.

One more thing that you all are missing is that for the employees to request a “secret ballot” it doesn’t take 50% to request it, it doesn’t take even 40% of the employees, it only takes 30%<b> or greater to request a secret ballot and that’s what they have, a “secret ballot”. <b> THAT"S RIGHT 30% that’s it!!!!

JOe-

“Wal-Mart the NLRB was created soley for the employees by providing secret ballot elections to LET THEM choose whether they want union representation or not.”

Just like your last statement.  Ignorant.  Care to show me where you can back that statement up.  Seeing as 500,000 people this year alone became union members through card check, would that not be a violation of the Wagoner Act since the SOLE purpose was “providing secret ballot elections to LET THEM choose whether they want union representation or not?”

Here is a little piece of advice Read the National Labor Relations Act (Wagner Act), Bill H.R. 1409, Bill S 560, or have someone read them to you.  Tell them to go SLOW.  You are particularilly looking for where it states card checks are not allowed, or where it gives unions the “right” to make employees life a “living hell.”

A little history on union certification elections.  The majority of all elections were card check the only secrect ballot elections that were held were when there were two or more unions who claimed the work then AFTER the employees voted to “go union” through card check, the employees would have a “secret ballot” election to see which union would represent them.

Hate to burts all of your “purists” bubbles, but not only is it allowed, but was also the foundation of organizing “back in the day.” Why?  Because as most people agree, we went through a time in this country that the unions were absolutely critical to change in the workplace.  Guess what?  Alot of people think we are there again, and that is why the EFCA is being presented.

“I’ll ask you again, if “card check” is such a good idea then why don’t we implement it in political elections?  If it’s so great for employees then “card check” must be great for the voting american public right?”

Make the rules the same for a union election as they are for a general political election and I will be the first one to say we don’t need EFCA.  Until that time you can’t compare the two you are comparing “apples to oranges.”

“my daughter and grandson are working people and my relatives and friends are working people...” ~RDS

Care to share with us how many of the “working people” you know work for either Wal-Mart or J.B. Hunt?

Why bring up J.B. Hunt?  You are no doubt aware that J.B. Hunt’s wife was Sam Walton’s sister.  Nothing like keeping it all in the “family.”

Big D,

“You know that getting cards signed is a long drawn out process. The company fights the organizers at every turn, they don’t give access to the employees, they don’t provide list’s of the employees names.”

Guess you don’t know much about the union organizing process, other than what YOU’VE been told!!  Do you even KNOW what an ‘employee organizer’ is?  An ‘employee organizer’ has full access to other employees and they also have an advantage of being able to apply peer pressure on their fellow employees!!

“The only way that you could have that kind of time frame is if it were mandatory for the employees to attend meetings”

That could be a feature of the EFCA, 1 meeting for the union with the NLRB present, at which time, ‘cards’ could be signed and if they get the 51% , fine and a ‘secret ballot vote’ would follow, if not, the process ends!!

Screwedby,

“Care to share with us how many of the “working people” you know work for either Wal-Mart or J.B. Hunt?”

I know 2 people who work for Wal-Mart and 1 that works at Sams Club, but none that work for J.B. Hunt!!  But, what does that matter, they are ‘workers’, not related to the Waltons and not in management!!

“You are no doubt aware that J.B. Hunt’s wife was Sam Walton’s sister.  Nothing like keeping it all in the “family.” “

And, are you aware, that in MOST smaller towns, there is a founding family that has roots in most of the local businesses?  So, what’s your point?

RDS

Yes I do know what an employee organizer is. But that does by in NO way mean that that person would have knowledge of every employee. The company does NOT give the union a list of names of current employees and they sure as hell don’t up date new hires names.

With the schedules that WM has I would wager that their are people that have worked at the same store for years and have never run into one another.

As far as employees pressuring their fellow workers, I have NEVER HEARD OF A UNION ORGANIZER FIRING ANY EMPLOYEES FOR NOT SIGNING A CARD. But it happens all the time to employees that are interested in joining a union. Studies show that companies routinely fire a “large number” (around 17% of the known union sympathizers) to put the fear of Wal-Mart in them! So I think that it’s clear who the bullies are, but for those of you that cant figure it out (RDS, bbrd, er, Someone, and lets not forget JOe) with out it being spelled out, I’ll help, B-U-S-I-N-E-S-S!

Walmart is caught between a rock and a hard place now.
They can’t cry about increased labour costs and so they can’t use the union as an excuse to close the store.
The union stays.
Exactly what Walmart doesn’t want.

R E M E M B E R
J O N Q U I E R E
Q U E B E C
Home of Walmart Worker Abuse

R E M E M B E R
J A C K S O N V I L L E
T E X A S
Home of Walmart Worker Abuse

R E M E M B E R
G A T I N E A U
Q U E B E C
Home of Walmart Worker Abuse

Big D,

“But that does by in NO way mean that that person would have knowledge of every employee.”

That is why, when organizing, you have MORE than one ‘employee organizer’, we had 8!!  Have YOU ever been an ‘employee organizer’?  Well, I have and you can be sure that we were told by the union organizer, to belittle anyone who said they were against the union!!  We were told to explain to them, how they would be hurting the other employees and ‘cheating’ them out of ‘better wages and benefits’!!  And, of course, we let them know, that if the union failed to get in, it would be their fault that the others wouldn’t be able to support their families!!  Bingo, ‘check card’ signed, then when the ‘secret ballot’ vote came, union LOST!!  Without that ‘secret ballot’ vote, the TRUE wishes would not have been known!!

It’s easy to get someone to sign a ‘card’, when you are face to face, but that doesn’t mean they will ‘vote’ your way in a ‘secret ballot’ voting booth!!

...the TRUE wishes...

And just who makes that determination? Perhaps signing the card was the “TRUE wishes” and the actual vote was under duress.

The superior man understands what is right; the inferior man understands what will sell. ~ Confucius

And just who makes that determination? Perhaps signing the card was the “TRUE wishes” and the actual vote was under duress.

You’re kidding right?????  What bas-ackward logic is that?  Were they guys with machine guns pointed at the voters head waiting outside the voting both?

You appear to be unaware of the tactics used by Wal-Mart to quash any attempt at unionization, Jill. The “machine gun” in this case is the fear of losing one’s job.

It might behoove you to do some back reading to improve your own ‘logic’.

“Take care of your people, treat them well, involve them, and you won’t spend all your time and money hiring labor lawyers to fight the unions.” ~ Sam Walton

Ken V,

“And just who makes that determination?”

The ‘secret ballot vote’ does!!

“The “machine gun” in this case is the fear of losing one’s job. “

If the vote was ‘secret’, how does Wal-Mart know WHO to point the “machine gun’ at, everybody?  Unless the people are outspoken, Wal-Mart would never know who ‘voted’ which way!!  With the ‘card check’, they know EXACTLY who to point it at, because they can SEE the names on cards!!

And, if the union loses, guess who will be the first to go, the ones who signed the ‘cards’!!

RDS-

“If the vote was ‘secret’, how does Wal-Mart know WHO to point the “machine gun’ at, everybody?  Unless the people are outspoken, Wal-Mart would never know who ‘voted’ which way!!  With the ‘card check’, they know EXACTLY who to point it at, because they can SEE the names on cards!!

And, if the union loses, guess who will be the first to go, the ones who signed the ‘cards’!!”

Thank you, you just made our point for us.  Wal-mart will fire you if you are pro-union.  A blatant violation of the National Labor Relations Act.  And the EXACT need for the EFCA.

And the current NLRA provides mechanisms just for those cases in which employees are terminated for union activity.  The EFCA adds nothing other than union authorization via card check which will easily circumvent any practicality for employees to have a secret ballot election.  They will be overuled and many will be disenfranchised with no vote.

Wal-Mart start paying,

“Thank you, you just made our point for us.  Wal-mart will fire you if you are pro-union.”

A company will NEVER fire you for ‘being pro-union’, but, they will watch pro-union people and fire them for something else!!  When I was an ‘employee organizer’ (3 years in a row), I was able to keep my job for another 10 years, but all the others got fired, why did I escape firing, because I didn’t give the company a REASON to fire me, the others did!!

To a company, being pro-union, is the same as being a suspected thief, drug user, or someone who violates company policy, they are looked at as someone who may be a detriment to the company’s operation and if they DO something to prove it, they will be fired, just like any other person who becomes a detriment to the company!!

Walmart workers now need to be organized in more and more locations in Canada. Keep organizing and bring more and more locations on board.
Only after a significant amount are unionized will the company start listening to the workers concerns.
The open door policy is a fiasco.

R E M E M B E R
J O N Q U I E R E
Q U E B E C
Home of Walmart Worker Abuse

R E M E M B E R
J A C K S O N V I L L E
T E X A S
Home of Walmart Worker Abuse

R E M E M B E R
G A T I N E A U
Q U E B E C
Home of Walmart Worker Abuse

RDS

So you and you alone survived! You must be some kind of SUCK ASS!

The rest were fired for their union affiliation, you can call it anything that you want. If the company wants you gone the WILL invent a reason to fire you.

Obviously you made another 10 years with the company because you turned on your brothers and became company lap dog. Your post only shows you for the spineless WORM that you are.

A company will NEVER fire you for ‘being pro-union’, but, they will watch pro-union people and fire them for something else!!

With your propensity for hair splitting, RDS, you should have been a barber. Or maybe a ‘stylist’.

Of course a company “will NEVER fire you for ‘being pro-union’”. That would be....illegal.

What’s good for Wal-Mart is BAD for America!
(and that includes Canada & Mexico)

Big D,

“You must be some kind of SUCK ASS!”

That is usually what a lazy, ‘poor’ worker, calls people who DO THEIR JOB!!  Besides, I was ‘smart’ enough to let the company know that I would cause them problems, if they tried to trump up reasons to fire me!!

“Obviously you made another 10 years with the company because you turned on your brothers”

In a way, you are right, I turned my back on all the idiots that ‘voted’ against the union and made us union supporters a target of the company!!  You don’t know how many times, after a union drive failed, I had people who I know ‘voted’ against the union, come up to me and tell me how the company ‘screwed’ them and asked what I could do about it!!  Then, on the next vote, they voted against the union again!!  After 3 failed attempts, you kind of get the feeling that the people DON’T want the union!!

See, you still don’t get it, I’m NOT against unions and employees unionizing!!  I am just for ‘fair’ elections based on the wishes of the employees, not the union!!  But, I have to say, that I also think that a union in Wal-Mart would turn out to be a disaster, because I think most of the employees don’t CARE enough to have it run smoothly!!  High school and college students aren’t looking for long term employment and benefits, neither are retirees!!

“Your post only shows you for the spineless WORM that you are.”

You can think what you want, but, I was the one who started the union drives after being with the company only 3 months, I put my job on the line for those ingrates, 3 times!!  And, everytime, the employees stuck it to me!!  If you call that ‘spineless’, you don’t know what ‘spineless’ means!!  You may never know the feeling of sadness you get, hearing the NLRB guy say, “The vote failed”, it feels like a knife stuck in your back!!  Now, think about that happening 3 times!!  If I’m ‘spineless’, it’s because my fellow employees ripped it out!!

I put my job on the line for those ingrates, 3 times!!  And, everytime, the employees stuck it to me!!

You sound bitter, RDS. So tell me. is getting it “stuck” to you a good life choice?

Wal-Mart: “You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.” ~ Obi-wan Kenobi

Jill in-

“And the current NLRA provides mechanisms just for those cases in which employees are terminated for union activity.  The EFCA adds nothing other than union authorization via card check which will easily circumvent any practicality for employees to have a secret ballot election.  They will be overuled and many will be disenfranchised with no vote.”

Jill, Jill, Jill, Sweetheart you are misinformed.  First, Under the current laws there is no penalty for employee termination.  There is no avenue to make the companies monetarily affected.  Under EFCA there will be fines imposed and backpay awarded.

Second, the EFCA does not ADD Card Check, it is already an accepted manner with which to organize.  Just ask the 500,000 Communication Workers of America members who used it to organized.

You people just don’t get it...it takes 50% + 1 to certify a union.  That is a majority vote.  NLRB “secret ballot” elections are still offered to the employees under EFCA with 30% card check, THAT GOES FOR DECERTIFICATION TOO, you still only need 30%.  That is only 3 out of every 10.

Don’t confuse ‘Jill’ with facts, Baraboo. Her/his mind is made up.

RDS & Jill went up to Bentonville
To fetch some Wal-Mart propaganda.
RDS fell down and broke his crown
And Jill came tumbling after!

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that. ~ George Carlin

Dear dear dear Wal-Mart,

“First, Under the current laws there is no penalty for employee termination.  There is no avenue to make the companies monetarily affected. “

How wront you are.  Last time I checked that’s where the courts come into play with civil suits for wrongful termination.  And you don’t have to be a union member to file suit.  That’s unless you believe that it’s OK to break laws and not be punished for them.

“Second, the EFCA does not ADD Card Check, it is already an accepted manner with which to organize.  Just ask the 500,000 Communication Workers of America members who used it to organized.

Second, the EFCA does not ADD Card Check, it is already an accepted manner with which to organize.  Just ask the 500,000 Communication Workers of America members who used it to organized. “

Get your head out of your bottom.  You know exactly what I mean.  Get 50% + 1 to sign a card and the union is IN.  There is no secret ballot ever called.  Why do you think the unions want it so much?  It gives them carte blanche to intimidate workers as much as they want but now they only have to convince 50% + 1 of the employee count.  The remaining 50% - 1 will NEVER get a say and they become totally disenfranchised because THE SECRET BALLOT ELECTION OPTION WILL BE ELIMINATED as an option for them.

Do you truly believe that EFCA is about free choice for employees and that EFCA will not null and void secret ballot elections from ever taking place?

Jill

You need to stop watching FOX NEWS (ha,ha, fox news...that cracks me up) and do your homework!

All it takes is 30% of the employees to call for a ”secret ballot” and guess what; they get a secret ballot! And that’s if 70% of the employees don’t want one! In this case the 30% minority rules!

So stick that in your crack pipe and smoke it!

Jill-

“How wront you are.  Last time I checked that’s where the courts come into play with civil suits for wrongful termination.  And you don’t have to be a union member to file suit.  That’s unless you believe that it’s OK to break laws and not be punished for them.”

Civil suits are paid for out of my pocket.  If I were working for Wal-Mart do you think I could afford a lawyer to fight them and their legal team in court?  Under EFCA they are fighting the PENALTIES imposed on them by the NLRB (of which cannot be imposed at this time.) I understand that Wal-Mart has more money than the Federal Government.  However thier lawyers aren’t going to bully the Attornies General.

Under the curent NLRA there is NO monetary punishment per offense to the companies.  Under EFCA they can impose up to $10,000 per offense.  That can get very expensive to unlawful terminations for major corporations.  And The NLRB handles the legal aspect for the employee.  Now the employee will have their own standing legal defense just like the “big-boys.”

Remember the NLRA is for EMPLOYEES and EMPLOYEES ONLY.  And it guarantees EMPLOYEE RIGHTS.  Is it such a big surprise that the employers don’t want the employees exercising these rights.

“All it takes is 30% of the employees to call for a ”secret ballot” and guess what; they get a secret ballot! And that’s if 70% of the employees don’t want one! In this case the 30% minority rules! “

Wow Big D you really are dumber than a box of rocks.  So by your logic the other 70% don’t get a say at all when it comes to unionizing?  So what is that “secret ballot” vote they get?  Is that just to humble them and it has no meaning?

“Civil suits are paid for out of my pocket.  If I were working for Wal-Mart do you think I could afford a lawyer to fight them and their legal team in court?”

One word, CONTINGENCY.  And it’s used every day in our legal system.  It won’t cost them a cent unless the employee wins and you don’t think some deep pocket lawyer won’t take on that case?  HA HA

btw, the NLRA was created for Employees AND Employers.  Take a look at the Workplace rights at nlrb.gov

“btw, the NLRA was created for Employees AND Employers.  Take a look at the Workplace rights at nlrb.gov “

No, the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 (12 years after the passage of the Wagner Act) started to restrict the unions and employees.  NOT the original act.  There was not one mention of unfair labor practices against employees in the original Act, only against employers.

The NLRA of 1935 was created for the employees.  I happen to notice Section 7 is titled Rights of Employees, where is the section titled Rights of the Employer?

“Wow Big D you really are dumber than a box of rocks.  So by your logic the other 70% don’t get a say at all when it comes to unionizing?  So what is that “secret ballot” vote they get?  Is that just to humble them and it has no meaning?”

No, by his logic 70% dont get a say as to whether or not the election takes place.  Not whether or not they unionize.  His point is it takes 20% LESS to get an election. Certification or Decertification than it takes to get the union in or out!

Jill

Your blond roots are showing.

I’m going to go real slow so that you can keep up, OK?

“If one-third of workers want to have an NLRB election at their workplace, they can still ask the federal government to hold an election. The Employee Free Choice Act simply gives them another option—majority sign-up.”

And this should take some of the wind out of your sails.

And this from THE WALL STREET JOURNAL editorial page........

<b>"The bill doesn’t remove the secret ballot option from the National Labor Relations Act…."</i>

Why don’t you take a break, go Tea Bag with a friend.

Ken V,

“You sound bitter, RDS. So tell me. is getting it “stuck” to you a good life choice? “

Yes it was, because I learned a good lesson, NO GOOD DEED GOES UNPUNISHED!!  That is why I have never had anything to do with a union since!!  And, another good lesson I learned, was that not everybody you try to HELP will thank you for it, most will stick it to you, probably because if they needed help in the first place, they haven’t made many ‘good’ life choices!!

“No, by his logic 70% dont get a say as to whether or not the election takes place.  Not whether or not they unionize.  His point is it takes 20% LESS to get an election. Certification or Decertification than it takes to get the union in or out! “

HUGE… HUGE… HUGE difference between 70% get a RIGHT TO VOTE vs. 50% - 1 getting ZERO say on if they want a union or not.  EFCA “card check” of 50% + 1 WILL ALWAYS disenfranchise 50% - 1 of the employee base.  At least current NLRA rules make it possible for EVERYONE to have a say.

“The Employee Free Choice Act simply gives them another option—majority sign-up.”… “The bill doesn’t remove the secret ballot option from the National Labor Relations Act….”

What a crock of sh&t;and you know it.  Current NLRA rules call for employees not to be discriminated against for pro-union activity but somehow Walmart in Baraboo says the rules are not worth they paper they are written on, hence the “need” for EFCA.

Stop hiding behind your false righteousness for employees.  We all know the realities that EFCA will eliminate any real life practicality for secret ballot elections.  Instead it’s an “open door” policy for union intimidation.  You know it.  I know it.  Employers know it and most of all Unions know it.  That’s why they have put their heart and soul (as well as multiple millions of dollars in campaign contributions) behind this bill.  The unions are salivating as we speak.  If you believe otherwise then you truly are a fool of immense proportions.

Yes it was...

How conveniently self-serving your ‘philosophy’ is, RDS. If you benefit, it’s a good life choice. If you make a mistake, it’s a good life choice because you learned a lesson.

Not only do you sound bitter, but you remind me of death row inmates that find ‘religion’.

“wal-mart is one big piece of shit with a door” ~ ananomous

Jill

You just can’t be that DUMB!

If 30% of the employees want a “secret ballot” election, then a secret ballot election is scheduled. How hard is that for you to grasp?

Now if 30% call for a ‘secret ballot” election and 70% don’t want a “secret ballot” election, guess what, the 70% that don’t want a “secret ballot” election are overruled by the minority(30%).

Can I make it any easier for your DUMB tea bagging ASS! Is it really possible that you are that stupid, that you can’t follow something that simple and easy.........yes.

Let me make it so simple that even you can follow!

Okay Jill, now pay attention: if there are 10 employees working at store X and the store is being organized, even if they get 7 people that want a CARD CHECK and a card check only, but 3 decide that they want a SECRET BALLOT election as well, the wishes of the 7 (the majority) that want the card check only are overruled by the wishes of the 3 (the minority) that want a SECRET BALLOT as well as the card check. Do you get it now? Was that SIMPLE enough for you to follow?

Btw Jill, for every dollar being spent to get this legislation passed by the unions, the business community has spent a ten to derail it! The so called secret ballot has been an anti-labor tool since its inception. You try to sound as though you care about the workers, but in reality you are as anti labor as they come! Save your CROCODILE TEARS for another site. We all know that you could care less about the workers of the world.

Big D your ignorance precedes you and yet still flows with everyone of your posts.

Now if 30% call for a ‘secret ballot” election and 70% don’t want a “secret ballot” election, guess what, the 70% that don’t want a “secret ballot” election are overruled by the minority(30%).

You keep clinging to that magic 70% as the end all be all when in reality BEFORE ANY AUTHORIZATION CAN TAKE PLACE 100% GET A SAY under current NLRA rules.  If your magical 70% feel that strongly about card check (assuming they feel that “freely” without union intimidation), then they should have ZERO problem with an election where they can just confirm their wishes.  In the end EVERYONE gets a say not just a select group.  It’s that freedom to freely choose that seperates the US.  Card check is not about “freely choose”, secret ballot IS.

Under EFCA cut that in half as you disenfranchise 50% - 1 of the employee base.  That’s what EFCA is all about.  Are you that stupid to not see that?  Are you that blinded in your abject hatred for employees that you say “let’s just throw away 50% -1 of the employee base BECAUSE WE DON’T CARE ABOUT THEM”?  The ends justify the means.  Talk about not giving a sh$t about employees!!!!  I sure as hell care for the workers more than you do.  If the “secret ballot has been an anti-labor tool since its inception” then why not throw it out for general elections as well?  Why not fight for a law that is fair to employers, employees and unions?  Your aim is to fix current NLRA problems with even worse problems?  Did your mother not teach you that 2 wrongs don’t make a right?  But I guess for you in the end your “love of union” justifies your “means” for screwing over half an employee base.  That’s pretty twisted.

Ken V,

“How conveniently self-serving your ‘philosophy’ is, RDS. If you benefit, it’s a good life choice. If you make a mistake, it’s a good life choice because you learned a lesson.”

I think you got it, but don’t know it!!  Why would anyone NOT want to be ‘self-serving’?  That’s how you HELP yourself to get ahead in life!!  But, here’s the IMPORTANT part, we all make mistakes, it’s LEARNING FROM THEM and not making the same mistakes over again!!  Most generational ‘poor’ people, keep making the same mistakes their parents made and then keep making them over and over again!!  Example:  The woman who has 3 kids, by 3 different fathers, never been married and has NEVER filed for or collected child support from any of the fathers!!  She never LEARNED a lesson the first time!!  Oh, look, she’s pregnant again!!  And, how about the guy, who has been incarcerated 5 times, he never learned either!!  Or, the drug user, who goes through withdrawal and then celebrates by getting ‘high’!!

“you remind me of death row inmates that find ‘religion’.”

How’s that?  I have always HAD ‘religion’, that’s why I am NOT on ‘death row’ to begin with!!  Those on ‘death row’ are some of the people I talk about, that have made those ‘bad’ choices in life and never learned!!  Those are the people who are being ‘forced’ to take ‘Personal Responsibility’ for their actions, had they thought about ‘Personal Responsibility’ before hand, they wouldn’t be on ‘death row’!!

Jill-

Explain this to me. 

If you hold a secret election and the vote is 50%+1 for the union the union STILL COMES IN.  Even though 50%-1 don’t want it. You miss the point 50%-1 always doesn’t get their wishes represented in a majority election.

“What a crock of sh&t;and you know it.  Current NLRA rules call for employees not to be discriminated against for pro-union activity but somehow Walmart in Baraboo says the rules are not worth they paper they are written on, hence the “need” for EFCA.”

You are damn right.  Because you NEVER hear of violations to the NLRA.  Companies are not afraid of using fear/intimidation as strategies for busting union drives.  Using many illegal tactics. “If you believe otherwise then you truly are a fool of immense proportions.”

The National Labor Relations Board just found Wal-Mart guilty of illegally firing a union supporter, bribing employees, and discriminatorily refusing to protect union supporters from the harassment of their anti-union coworker, all in an effort to prevent workers from forming a union at its Kingman, AZ, store.

http://walmartwatch.com/blog/archives/nlrb_finds_wal_mart_guilty_of_union_busting/

I warned you about doing a little back reading before shooting off your mouth, Jill. If you would just listen to me, you would make better life choices.

Bwa-ha-ha-ha!

Live Better In Cheap Underwear

By DON McINTOSH, Associate Editor

United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) woke up late to the threat of Wal-Mart, said Al Zack, assistant director of the union’s department of strategic programs.

For the first three decades of its now-legendary expansion, Wal-Mart was a discount retailer. It specialized in rural areas, and it gathered speed in low-wage, non-union parts of the country. In the last decade, having swallowed the heartland, Wal-Mart turned its attention to the coasts. And it was not until the mid-’90s that it began rolling out its new “supercenters” - one-stop shopping stores combining retail with grocery and in some instances gasoline. That placed Wal-Mart in direct competition with UFCW-represented grocery stores.

UFCW tried to organize the new competition, but quickly found that the company’s fanatic commitment to keeping down costs made it possibly the most anti-union company in America. For thoroughness and sophistication, Wal-Mart’s anti-union campaign is unrivaled. Because at least seven Wal-Mart managers have defected and now work for the union, the UFCW has a pretty good idea of the Wal-Mart anti-union game plan.

It starts in hiring, where managers are trained in how to spot people who are potential union sympathizers. In Las Vegas, according to Gretchen Adams, a Wal-Mart manager who defected to the UFCW in December 2001, that included anyone who had ever worked in a union shop, or even had a relative who belonged to a union. Adams said at new stores she helped open, applicants were interviewed by five managers before being hired. Zack believes Wal-Mart maintains a union “no-hire” list, a blacklist which would be illegal under U.S. labor law.

After hiring begins indoctrination. Their first day on the job, employees, called “associates” in Wal-Mart lingo, are shown a 16-minute anti-union video. And they’re told their company is family-oriented, has good benefits, puts the customer first, has an open-door management style, shares its profits with all, gives back to the community…

“Wal-Mart does a great job of brainwashing,” Adams said. “They call it Wal-Mart culture.” Like other managers, as often as three times a day Adams led three 15 to 45-minute “rallies” - employee meetings that would end with the “Wal-Mart cheer.”

To prevent associates from hearing any alternative view, Wal-Mart goes to extraordinary lengths to keep union organizers from contacting employees. Union organizers are forbidden to solicit employees on the job, and company policy makes it hard for pro-union workers to help union organizers contact co-workers off the job. On name tags, on the schedule, in meetings, company policy requires that Wal-Mart associates be referred to only by their first names (or first names and an initial for very common names.) Employee schedules are posted behind glass so no one can remove them. Anyone taking notes or photographing the schedule would be caught on closed-circuit camera, one of as many as 40 cameras that may be placed around a Wal-Mart store. The parking lot is also monitored.

An employee who shows an interest in other employees’ last names is marked by management as a “person who bears watching.”

In Urbana, Ohio, a Wal-Mart worker was given a written warning for trying to get her co-workers’ addresses to invite them to a baby shower.

At the first hint of union activity, managers are supposed to call a hotline in Bentonville that activates the company’s anti-union rapid response team, who may arrive as early as the next morning, empowered to take direct control of the store. Within days, local managers are trained to be the anti-union campaign’s front line. The union has obtained copies of anti-union manuals used by the company [one is available on-line at www.walmartyrs.com]. Associates known to be contaminated by a union organizer’s visit are singled out for special treatment, called into meetings one-on-one by specially trained company personnel. Zack said Wal-Mart had 12 specialists in its union-avoidance department before UFCW even began trying to organize. Now it has over 80.

The UFCW hopes to keep them busy.

The union began a nationwide organizing blitz in September 1999. Organizing drives have been launched in Nevada, Texas, Florida, Michigan, Kentucky and Indiana. In Louisville and Las Vegas, UFCW even has weekly radio shows designed to educate Wal-Mart workers about the labor movement and talk about Wal-Mart.

- MORE -

The union saw its first victory in March 2000, when meat department workers at a Jacksonville, Texas, Wal-Mart voted 7 to 3 to join the union. The company immediately announced it would phase out all meat departments (a move described in an internal memo as “the ultimate anti-union strategy"). It later rescinded that announcement. But it has refused to bargain with the Jacksonville workers, arguing to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that the meat department wasn’t an appropriate bargaining unit. And it terminated four of the pro-union workers. [Three years later, the company agreed to pay back-pay to the fired workers to settle an NLRB complaint, but refused reinstatement.]

“Wal-Mart does a very good job of getting rid of union supporters,” Zack said - assigning managers to watch them closely until they make some fireable mistake - like eating a banana, in one case.

In another case that went to trial, an NLRB administrative law judge described a pro-union associate at a Kingman, Arizona, Wal-Mart tire/ lube unit as “a marked man.”

The NLRB has issued over 40 complaints against Wal-Mart in the last three years, charging it with violations of labor law.

Such lawbreaking is inevitable, Zack said, because the company will do whatever it takes to keep a union out.

“Wal-Mart must know what we know - that the first store to go union is going to breach the dam.” Zack said that’s because, contrary to the company’s propaganda, many workers can see themselves how poor the company’s pay and benefits are compared to their union counterparts. They earn within a couple dollars of minimum wage. The company medical plan is unaffordable to most - “catastrophic” coverage with high deductibles and premiums that range from $15.50 to $118.50 every two weeks. The retirement plan consists of a 401(k), to which Wal-Mart contributes 2 percent (2 percent of $8 an hour, remember.) There’s also a profit-sharing plan in which employees are gradually vested over two to seven years, that is based on investments in company stock.

Many critics of Wal-Mart’s labor policies portray the company as a chronic low-wage employer, an employer that pays so low that its workers are forced to accept public assistance for food, housing, or health care, meaning in effect the taxpayer is subsidizing the company’s payroll.

Adams said the mantra about the open-door worked - she heard many tales of deprivation when she was a Wal-Mart manager. “Somebody would be upset, with tears in their eyes, telling me about their financial problems, saying they couldn’t afford both health care and food for their kids. I would send them to the personnel manager, who would refer them to government agencies and food banks.”

- MORE -

In one case, Adams recalls, Wal-Mart co-workers took up a collection to help get an apartment for an associate who was living in her car.

As if low wages weren’t hardship enough, the company is developing a record of violating wage and hour laws. About 30 states have initiated lawsuits against Wal-Mart for making workers perform overtime work without pay. The company reportedly paid $50 million two years ago to settle a Colorado unpaid overtime lawsuit involving 69,000 workers. In New Mexico, it paid half a million dollars to settle a suit involving about 100 workers. And in December, in the first such case to go to trial, a Portland jury found Wal-Mart guilty of forcing employees at 18 Oregon stores to work overtime without pay from 1993 to 1999.

[Meanwhile, a class action lawsuit filed in June 2001 charges that Wal-Mart systematically discriminates against its female employees in promotions, compensation, and training at over 3,300 Wal-Mart stores nationwide.]

Today, some 3,000 Wal-Mart employees around the country subscribe to a UFCW e-mail list, and employees at more than 100 stores in over 25 states are trying to unionize.

And UFCW wants them as members - not only to help them win better wages and working conditions, but to protect existing UFCW members. People only spend so much on grocery items, UFCW knows. So when a Wal-Mart moves in, it takes away business from existing retailers. Because they operate on low profit margins, grocery stores react very quickly to lost sales by cutting hours. Competition from Wal-Mart has been mentioned as a factor in hundreds of recent layoffs at Fred Meyer.

“One of our journeyman clerks makes $15.20, and then a senior Wal-Mart worker makes $7 to $9. Our employers, if they lose business, cut the hours of our members,” said Jeff McDonald, union representative at Tigard-based UFCW Local 555.

Even the threat of a Wal-Mart drives down wages, McDonald said, because the company’s unionized competitors are able to make a more credible argument that they will go out of business without wage concessions. Eugene grocery workers nearly went on strike against such concessions after the employer group argued that the Wal-Mart invasion - three new Wal-Marts in Eugene in the last several years - made it necessary to cut medical benefits and wages.

-MORE-

UFCW’s first priority is to organize Wal-Mart to take wages out of competition, but as long as the company remains a low-wage, non-union employer, the union intends to be a part of community coalitions that try to block stores from opening. When doing so, the union finds a multitude of allies opposed to Wal-Mart for increasing traffic woes, noise, unattractive buildings, driving out small local businesses, favoring sweatshop-produced goods, and in general being a bad corporate neighbor.

Wal-Mart is currently trying to get approval to build new two new stores in the Portland area, and citizens have been turning out in large numbers in opposition.

At a March 12 Hillsboro Planning Commission hearing on a proposed Wal-Mart supercenter at Cornelius Pass and Baseline roads in Hillsboro, 350 local residents turned out. The store would be the largest Wal-Mart in Oregon - 210,155 square feet. The hearing began at 7 p.m. Just two residents testified in favor of Wal-Mart. Testimony against lasted until 1 a.m. The commission will continue to take written testimony until April 9, and could make a decision as early as its May 14 meeting.

In Oregon City, 150 people came out Feb. 26 for the first public hearing on a proposed store at Molalla Avenue and South Beavercreek Road on a site that would require a zoning change in order to get rid of some low-income housing. City planners have recommended that the Planning Commission reject Wal-Mart’s proposal, for reasons of traffic, architectural design and compatibility with the area. A decision may come at its April 8 meeting.

Though union members make up a small portion of the residents who have come out to oppose the new sites, UFCW expects to continue to take part in such “site fights.” In little more than a decade, Wal-Mart has gone from selling no groceries at all to become the nation’s number one seller of groceries. With the company planning to build 200 to 210 new supercenters during its next fiscal year, if UFCW wants to protect its members, it will have little choice but to fight.

http://www.nwlaborpress.org/2003/4-4-03WalMart.html

Discounting Rights
Wal-Mart’s Violation of US Workers’ Right to Freedom of Association

http://www.hrw.org/en/node/10970/section/1

“This report examines in depth the tactics that Wal-Mart uses to preempt workers’ organizing efforts and undermine workers’ freedom of association at its US stores.After offering a brief history of Wal-Mart, a summary of worker concerns with employment conditions, and a survey of relevant US and international law, the report details Wal-Mart’s anti-union tactics.The report focuses first on tactics and policies that, though they largely comply with US law, create a work environment so hostile to union formation that they coercively interfere with workers’ internationally recognized right to decide freely for themselves whether to organize.A separate chapter examines Wal-Mart’s anti-union tactics that violate both US and international law and contribute to the generalized fear many Wal-Mart workers report feeling whenever the topic of union formation is broached.Five separate case studies illustrate the very real human impacts of Wal-Mart’s attack on workers’ right to freedom of association.”

Eye opening report.  Based on fact, not assumption.  A must read.

If you hold a secret election and the vote is 50%+1 for the union the union STILL COMES IN.  Even though 50%-1 don’t want it. You miss the point 50%-1 always doesn’t get their wishes represented in a majority election.

But did 100% of the employee base have a vote and say?  Before that vote did they absolutely know that there would be at least a 50% approval?  It’s just like a baseball game.  The Steelers are a much better team than the Lions but before they play do know who will win?  Let them have the vote and make sure EVERYONE gets a vote.  If 50%+1 vote a union in then majority rules.  There, that’s not too hard is it Walmart in Baraboo.

The National Labor Relations Board just found Wal-Mart guilty of illegally firing a union supporter, bribing employees, and discriminatorily refusing to protect union supporters from the harassment of their anti-union coworker, all in an effort to prevent workers from forming a union at its Kingman, AZ, store.

shhhhhh..... don’t pass that story on the Walmart in Baraboo.  He’s under the belief that you can’t fight a company via the NLRB and win let alone pay damages in back pay.  He just may wake up to reality.

Jill

If it is a card check, every employee that works for the company has an opportunity to ether sign a card or not. I they sign a card then they are VOTING for a union by showing their support for unionization, if the don’t they are VOTING against. Ether way their vote is counted, it’s that simple.

If there are 100 employees and 60 sign the check card and 40 refuse then the final tally would be 60% of the work force signed (voted yes) and 40% did not sign (voted no) I thought that any MORON could figure this out.

Jill-

From above mentioned Human Rights Watch report:

“After receiving the petition for union recognition in the fall of 2000, the NLRB ruled that the appropriate bargaining unit in the Kingman, Arizona, TLE consisted of the roughly thirty total TLE workers and ordered an election for October 27, 2000.The election was postponed indefinitely after the UFCW filed unfair labor practice charges against Wal-Mart on October 24, 2000. [755] Between October 2000 and May 2002, the union amended those original charges and filed new ones, and in February 2003, an NLRB administrative law judge found Wal-Mart guilty of seven unfair labor practices: 1) unlawful surveillance of TLE workers during late August and early September 2000; 2) granting workers benefits and improved working conditions to discourage workers from supporting the union; 3) denying workers merit raises during the union organizing campaign and threatening to continue to do so during collective negotiations; 4) discriminatorily failing to enforce the company’s non-harassment policy against a union opponent; 5) firing Jones for engaging in union activity; 6) denying Jones COBRA coverage after he was terminated; and 7) including language in the company’s 2001 and 2002 employee benefits books that threatened workers with the loss of company benefits if they supported the union. [756] In so finding, the ALJ commented:
[T]here is no doubt that the various managers exercised a maximum effort in an attempt to remain non-union.In my view, the degree to which [Wal-Mart] conducted its election campaign demonstrated obvious animus towards the Local Union and its supporters. . . .[Wal-Mart] engaged in a very aggressive campaign to defeat the Local Union’s organizing efforts.While an employer certainly has the legal right to oppose a union’s organizing efforts, by the extent and method of their efforts, . . . Wal-Mart’s managers made sure the employees understood that this was not simply business as usual. [757]
The ALJ ordered Wal-Mart to cease and desist from the illegal conduct and to post a notice in its Kingman facility briefly setting forth workers’ rights under the NLRA, stating that the NLRB had found Wal-Mart in violation of US labor law, and committing not to engage in the specific unfair labor practices of which the company had been found guilty.The judge also ordered Wal-Mart to offer Brad Jones his former job back or, if it no longer existed, an equivalent position with no loss of seniority or benefits; pay him any lost earnings or benefits he may have suffered while illegally fired, including medical expenses incurred because he was denied COBRA; and delete from his files any reference to his dismissal. [758]
Wal-Mart disagreed with the ALJ’s findings.According to the ALJ decision, in response to the unfair labor practice charges, Wal-Mart had stated:
[T]he actions of its local, regional, and corporate officials, following the filing of the [union] petition, were intended merely to explain to its employees why union representation was not in their best interest, and constituted a totally lawful expression of free speech. . . .[Wal-Mart] alleges that any changes in the operation of its Kingman facility, following the filing of the petition, were merely the result of the normal operation and maintenance of the store.It denies any attempt to unlawfully influence its employees’ interest in supporting the Local Union.Any personnel actions taken were allegedly for legitimate business reasons, and unrelated to the union activity of the employees involved. [759]
Rather than comply with the order, Wal-Mart appealed all seven of the violations found by the ALJ.Six of those are still pending with the five-member Board in Washington, DC. [760] The seventh, addressing the illegal benefits book language, was settled.No union election was ever held at the facility.”

So Let me get this straight.  SEVEN counts of unfair labor practices, found guilty, ramifications: restore job, with lost wages (only if he made less that would have working at Walmart), post violations to employees, delay union vote for 7 years.

Penalties none.  You call these stringent laws?

Read the report.  If you want to I can read it to you if you can’t read it.

Only an idiot argues a point without understanding both sides.  I understand your side of the argument I JUST DONT AGREE WITH IT.

Big D,

“I they sign a card then they are VOTING for a union by showing their support for unionization, if the don’t they are VOTING against.”

If that’s so, can you EXPLAIN this:  When I was an ‘employee organizer’, we got 75% check cards signed, but LOST the ‘vote’, because we only got 33% of the ‘secret ballot vote’!!  So, your senerio in that case would be 75 of 100 signed cards, but only 33 of 100 ‘voted’ for the union!!  Why didn’t we get 75% of the ‘vote’, after all, we got 75% check cards signed?  Reason, employee ‘peer’ pressure, some will sign cards, just to keep from being ‘shunned’ or ‘degraded’ by other employees!!  Don’t forget, after the election, these people still have to work with each other!!  The union knows this and uses it to their advantage!!

Wal-Mart start paying,

“You call these stringent laws?”

So, are you saying that the LAW should ‘eliminate’ the APPEALS process?

RDS

“Reason, employee ‘peer’ pressure,”

No, more than likely the true reason would be pressure from the company!!!! The 3 years that the company stalled the election and watered down the vote by hiring more anti-union people and “letting’ go pro-union employees!!!!

BTW… At what point did you sell your soul to the company for your 30 pieces of silver. I find it funny that you went into management for that very same company that you tried to organize, while EVERY one of those people that were organizing with you were fired! Kind of makes you think, doesn’t it!.....You got promoted,they got fired, now you blog against labor, you do the math!

If it is a card check, every employee that works for the company has an opportunity to ether sign a card or not. I they sign a card then they are VOTING for a union by showing their support for unionization, if the don’t they are VOTING against. Ether way their vote is counted, it’s that simple.

You’re making 2 very HUGE assumptions.

1.  Did you ask ALL 100% of the employees if they want to sign the card or did you stop when you got to 50%+1

2.  Employees sign the card under duress because it was never a “free and open” process.

“check card” vs. “secret ballot"… there is no comparision as to which way is the democratic and BEST way to vote.  Not even close.

Jill

You are an anti-union SHILL and, let’s face it dear, you’re full of SHIT!

RDS-

“So, are you saying that the LAW should ‘eliminate’ the APPEALS process?”

Footnote....Wal-Mart lost the appeal.

Time elapsed 7 years.  No union election ever held.  Do you think that was in the employees best interests?  Or Wal-Marts?

All they had to do was commit 7 unfair labor violations to bust the union drive.  And WHAT WERE THE CONSEQUENCES?  Where is the deterrent?  I think Wal-mart considers this a win.  I know if I were in their position I would.

Just for the record, tell me again how the companies don’t use illegal tactics to break the union.  And how this is due process in a “fair” election.

Jill-

“2.  Employees sign the card under duress because it was never a “free and open” process.”

“Free and Open” just like in Kingman Az right?

You are an anti-union SHILL and, let’s face it dear, you’re full of SHIT!

Awe… did I hurt your feelings or upset you with the facts of my post Big D.  Sorry....

Time elapsed 7 years.  No union election ever held.  Do you think that was in the employees best interests?

Now this I agree with you Wal-mart in Baraboo.  This is completely unfair to employees.  If you really want to do some good for employees and be fair to employers and unions then FIX the EFCA (I should really say fix the NLRA) to these very specific points.

1.  Grant unions access to each employee for them to present their case
2.  Grant employers access to each employee for them to present their case
3.  If the unions can get even today’s 30% standard of employees to sign up then in my book that justifies interest
4.  Mandate that an election be scheduled in the next 30/60/90 days from that point.
5.  Let the employers and unions present any updated information
6.  Strenthen the penalties for employers AND unions for violations of unfair labor practices and intimidation
7.  Make sure EACH and EVERY employee is notified of election date/time etc. and make sure EACH and EVERY employee has an opportunity to vote.
8.  If 50% + 1 of the employee base approve of the union then it’s a done deal.

EFCA in it’s present form doesn’t fix labor issues.  It just compounds them with a whole new set of issues (issues btw the unions could care less about because it’s HEAVILY slanted in their favor and who gives a crap as long as they can collection their new found dues.)

It’s really not that hard folks.  Make these changes to the EFCA and it should and would sail through congress in a heart beat because it’s FAIR to all parties involved.

“So Let me get this straight.  SEVEN counts of unfair labor practices, found guilty, ramifications: restore job, with lost wages (only if he made less that would have working at Walmart), post violations to employees, delay union vote for 7 years.

So who delayed the elections for 7 year?  Walmart or the NLRB for taking so long to resolve it?  The beef is clearing with the NLRB for this one.  And where did it say “(only if the made less that would have working at Walmart)”.  Back pay for lost wages is just that BACK PAY FOR ALL LOST WAGES.  Who cares if he made other monies elsewhere.  Stop making up stuff Wal-mart.

As far as the COBRA lost, if that is the case then that is a CLEAR violation of COBRA laws.  NO ONE.... I REPEAT NO ONE should be denied COBRA coverage FOR ANY REASON INCLUDING TERMINATION.  That alone should have severe penalties and open the opportunity for employees to file a civil suit.

Jill-

“Back pay for lost wages is just that BACK PAY FOR ALL LOST WAGES.  Who cares if he made other monies elsewhere.  Stop making up stuff Wal-mart.”

From the ALJ

“(c) Make Brad Jones whole for any loss of earnings and other benefits suffered as a result of the discrimination against him, including any out of pocket medical costs incurred because of his denial of COBRA coverage, in the manner set forth in the remedy section of the judge’s decision.”

If Brad Jones has a job that pays equal or more money in the duration....THERE IS NO LOSS OF EARNINGS.  Ask any lawyer.  I am not making this up.

Jill-

I asked the lawyers for you.

From ruzicholaw.com

III. Calculation of Money Damages
A. Lost Back Pay
When evaluating a case, I like to look at the most straightforward form of damages first, back pay. If you were earning a salary of $40,000 a year and it’s been six
months since your termination date then you’ve lost approximately $20,000. If you’ve collected $5,000 in unemployment compensation then you’ve lost $15,000 in back pay.  If you’ve worked part-time during this period and earned another $8,000 then you’ve lost only $7,000.
Generally, you have to subtract your interim earnings and unemployment compensation from your lost back pay. The employer’s lawyer is going to be asking you all about this subject during the proceedings. Anything you earned since your termination is generally counted against lost back pay. After being terminated, you also have a duty to seek out similar employment. You cannot just sit back and do nothing
towards obtaining another job.”

Well I stand corrected on the back-pay.  It’s even more complicated than what you state based on what I just read from Standford Law when you have to factor in present value of earnings. 

In my book that is just plain wrong. Back-pay should be calculated as earnings not made from the employer regardless of current/replacement earnings.  From a penalty standpoint it favors the employer way too much because in most cases people will find other employment and that mitigates the former employers obligations.

Jill-

My point exactly.  Are you starting to see why I say there is no “penalty” in place for current emplyers under the NLRA?

They can be caught doing everything wrong and their harshest penalty is to post the fact that they were caught in the employees area.  Give me a break.  At least make them post it on the front door.

EFCA isn’t perfect.  But from a strictly employee point of view it is better than what they have now.

My point exactly.  Are you starting to see why I say there is no “penalty” in place for current emplyers under the NLRA? ....

EFCA isn’t perfect.  But from a strictly employee point of view it is better than what they have now.

Can you see my 8 points of what WILL make the EFCA the best option to the employee, employer and union?  Why would you want to replace a faulty NLRA process with as faulty a process as the present form EFCA?  Again, two wrongs don’t make a right.

Have those 8 points make up the base for a “true” EFCA and it will pass congress with flying colors.