Defining The Problem

Too often Democrats let Republicans define the debate, even during this era of epic conservative decline. In the traditional media, the debate over the Employee Free Choice Act has consistently been about whether or not unions want to "eliminate the right to a secret ballot election" for workers.

Now of course, this isn't true. In fact, even under EFCA, if 30% of the workforce calls for a vote, they get a vote. But this is not the real problem in labor-management relations. That argument is about the implications of EFCA passing. In fact, the current circumstances of labor elections is the problem that needs to be solved by EFCA. I finally found the best and most coherent argument around that at the AFL-CIO site (h/t Ezra). The truth is that the system for labor elections, the vaunted "secret ballot," is broken.

Today, CEOs get contracts that protect their wages and benefits. But some deny their employees the same opportunity. Although U.S. and international laws are supposed to protect workers' freedom to belong to unions, employers routinely harass, intimidate, coerce and even fire workers struggling to gain a union so they can bargain for better lives. And U.S. labor law is powerless to stop them. Employees are on an uneven playing field from the first moment they begin exploring whether they want to form a union, and the will of the majority often is crushed by brutal management tactics.

Cornell University scholar Kate Bronfenbrenner studied hundreds of organizing campaigns and found that:

Ninety-two percent of private-sector employers, when faced with employees who want to join together in a union, force employees to attend closed-door meetings to hear anti-union propaganda; 80 percent require supervisors to attend training sessions on attacking unions; and 78 percent require that supervisors deliver anti-union messages to workers they oversee.

Seventy-five percent hire outside consultants to run anti-union campaigns, often based on mass psychology and distorting the law.

Half of employers threaten to shut down partially or totally if employees join together in a union.

In 25 percent of organizing campaigns, private-sector employers illegally fire workers because they want to form a union.
Even after workers successfully form a union, in one-third of the instances, employers do not negotiate a contract.

If labor elections were legitimate, there wouldn't be the need for legislation. Instead, think of it as your "secret ballot" Presidential election marred by: mandatory pro-McCain training sessions held across the country, mandatory meetings where "Obama is a Muslim" propaganda is foregrounded, threats to take away your job if you vote for Obama, and threats to close your workplace entirely if Obama wins. There is nothing democratic about these one-sided farces characterized by intimidation and harassment. That's why we need a new system for determining whether workers want to collectively bargain, and majority signup is simply the best practice out there.

This week, hundreds of volunteers with SEIU fanned out to McDonald's restaurants across the country and asked them if they were comfortable with their CEO making 770 times what they make, while they oppose common sense steps to join unions for their workers. As a result, the company backed off its opposition!

After more than 500 activists visited nearly 100 McDonald’s locations nation wide to talk with workers and consumers about McDonald’s opposition to Employee Free Choice, the company released a statement saying their reported position against the bill was a “misrepresentation” and that they “try not to take sides in political issues.” [...]

This victory is a great start for our campaign to restore the middle class and protect workers’ rights to speak out for better wages and benefits. Standing together, we can make Employee Free Choice a reality!

The Employee Free Choice Act does not restrict workers' rights, it affirms them. We must make it a reality in 2009.

Good On Nancy Pelosi

She'll see your forcing a fast-track vote on the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, and raise you a blockage.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the House will change its rules so as to skirt a requirement that it vote on a free trade agreement with Colombia.

Pelosi says the House will vote on the rules change policy Thursday, effectively putting off a vote on a free trade agreement that is a key priority of the Bush administration.

"The president took his action. I will take mine tomorrow," Pelosi said.

The best part of this is maybe the Speaker recognizing that she has a hand to play and power to wield, making the unitary executive not all that unitary.

It's ridiculous that we're even having to deal with a free trade agreement at a time when the US economy is falling apart. But this particular free trade agreement, with a country where trade unionists are routinely killed, is particularly offensive. Colombia has a complete disregard for basic worker rights, and rewarding that with access to US markets would be absurd.

But as I said, it's Pelosi standing up for the legitimacy of Congress as a co-equal branch that makes this a heartening development.

Pelosi insisted that the House's right to determine its own procedures overrides any requirements that Congress take up a measure within a prescribed time period.

She said she is interested in taking up the agreement in an atmosphere that is "as unemotional as possible," but "that is not possible if the president of the United States is going to usurp the discretion of the speaker of the House to bring" legislation to the floor.

We all want Congress to act in a more oppositional manner. They're starting to get the message. Reward good behavior.

...asking John Yoo to have a chat works in this regard, too.

UPDATE: Then again, perhaps not. CongressDaily reports:

House Democratic leaders are seriously considering delaying a vote on the Colombia Free Trade Agreement until after the November elections, thereby providing needed cover for vulnerable rank-and-file members, according to senior Democratic leadership sources.

That would be fairly revolting. The situation is fluid...

Writer's Strike Update

Things are moving on a variety of fronts in the WGA strike. While the AMPTP stalls and makes baseless charges, the Guild is trying some novel approaches. Not only have they filed an unfair labor practices charge against the AMPTP for walking away from a good-faith negotiation, they are challenging the very idea of bargaining with a cartel like the AMPTP itself.

Confronted with a logjam in its contract talks with the studios, the Writers Guild of America is trying a new tack: Divide and conquer.

On Monday, the union representing 10,500 striking writers plans to approach the major companies of the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers about negotiating with them individually, a move aimed at exploiting perceived cracks in the alliance and getting at least some of the studios back to the bargaining table.

"We want to do everything in our power to move negotiations forward and end this devastating strike," the guild's negotiating committee said in a letter to be sent to union members today. "The internal dynamics of the [alliance] make it difficult for the conglomerates to reach consensus and negotiate with us on a give-and-take basis."

This approach is already bearing fruit. David Letterman's company, Worldwide Pants Inc., has agreed to negotiate their own deal with the writers . Because Letterman owns his program (as well as Late Night with Craig Ferguson), he can break with the AMPTP cartel and make this deal.

(I just want to step in and say that AMPTP.com is maybe the funniest parody site I've seen in a long time.)

But all is not well. With the AMPTP furious over these cracks in their united front (some would call it collusion), they've leaned on some of their stars to return to work.

Jay Leno and Conan O'Brien will return to late-night TV with fresh episodes on Jan. 2, two months after the writers' strike sent them into repeats, the network said Monday.

The "Tonight" show and "Late Night" will return without writers supplying jokes. NBC said the decision was similar to what happened in 1988, when Johnny Carson brought back the "Tonight" show two months into a writers' strike.

A similar return — with writers — appears in the works for David Letterman. The union representing striking writers said over the weekend that it was willing to negotiate deals with individual production companies, including Letterman's Worldwide Pants.

It's disappointing that Leno and O'Brien aren't willing to hold out and see the big picture, but of course they are under contract. It's telling that this move was made as soon as Letterman signaled his intention to strike a deal with the writers.

However, in contrast to this action, it appears that the writer's strike is opening up eyes about what it means to work in this country, about what it means to stand together for worker's rights. The DGA, after flirting with starting negotiations with the AMPTP, has demurred. The writers are promoting separate labor issues like the plight of FedEx workers being called "independent contractors" so management can avoid providing benefits. And they're aiding in significant victories for the worker's rights movement.

In a memo issued this afternoon, MTV Networks performed a near-180, relenting to complaints from freelancers who were told last week their benefits would be cut. "We've implemented a process for evaluating freelance and temporary employee positions for possible conversion to staff positions," reads the announcement from JoAnne Griffith, MTVN's executive vice president for HR. "This process is currently underway." Freelancers will now have the choice to continue with their current health plan—including dental!—or sign on to MTV's Aetna plan. Either way, they won't have to make the decision until February of next year, nearly three months after the original deadline set by the company last week.

The writer's strike is one of the most high-profile labor actions of the last 30 years. It's crystallizing a lot of ideas about basic fairness for workers. This is maybe the most positive by-product of this important action.