In depth post on American politics from me

[sabotabby]

The combination of this headline: "Obama may peg Clinton for top post" and this photo:



have put images in my mind. Bad images. Because I am 10.

P.S. If you don't know what that hand gesture is and/or what "pegging" is, please ask a grown-up.

Comments

Re: As an unapologetic remaining fan of the Clinton years

[rojonoir.livejournal.com]

"And yeah, I kind of hope, as a Woody Guthrie-listenin' fan of the wobblies, that the current anti-secret ballot initiative being proposed by democrats in Congress fails."

Have you ever seen how an NLRB election works? I'm guessing no.

First, you try to make sure 80% of the workers on board without tipping off management. At some point they find out, or you realize that you've talked to everyone you can without tipping off the boss, so you "go public" trying to talk to everyone. The moment management finds out, they will use a standard set of tactics to derail the election.

Of course, there are mandatory meetings, both group and one-on-one. They will intimidate workers - who can legally be fired if they refuse to go to the meetings. They will interrogate them to find who the union supporters. They will threaten to shut the place down, and promise to give everyone raises. Much of it is illegal, and the union is free to file unfair labor charges, but that means delaying the election until many months or years down the line when the charges is dealt with.

They will find excuses to fire pro-union people, they will hire new anti-union friends and relatives, they will promote pro-union people to supervisor roles so that their vote isn't counted. They will challenge the election, claiming that it's not an appropriate bargaining unit and that certain people need to be added or excluded. The union can challenge all this and can often win, but that means putting off the election indefinitely while they argue their case with the NLRB.

So they cut their losses, letting individual pro-workers be picked off one-by-one. Meanwhile, the workplace has become hellish, with workers getting disciplined for the tiniest of infractions and yelled at and demeaned all day long. The anti-union workers get promises of promotions and raises if the union is shot down, so they have an incentive to stay, but everyone else wants to leave, and some do.

By the time the election comes, if the pro-union workers have balls and ovaries of steel, did everything right, and started with a solid 80% super-majority, then they have a good chance of winning the election, but even then it isn't guaranteed.

If management can successfully stall a first contract for a year, then they will push for a decertification election, and the same election tactics come back.

Sure, *requiring* a card-check would be a problem, but if over 50% of the workers sign cards saying they voluntarily authorize a union to represent them in collective bargaining, how is it a good thing to say, "No, I'm sorry, but you need to be terrorized by your boss for a few months before we can trust that you honestly agree with the statement you signed."

Re: As an unapologetic remaining fan of the Clinton years

[febrile.livejournal.com]

The NLRB isn't on my most-favored list these days either, for what it's worth. It's not the organization it once was.

(No, I've never actually been a part of an NLRB election. My best friend down here in New Orleans had worked for labor organizers for five years before working with the NLRB for a year and a summer during law school. I'd love to be able to have the benefit of his input, but sadly he's not on LJ.)