The Status Quo: Employers Have Free Reign to Intimidate

Employee Free Choice Act opponents make the claim that letting workers join or form a union through the process of majority sign-up campaigns rather than a National Labor Board Election would disenfranchise workers. Business leaders claim that this would lead to worker intimidation by union organizers. What they don't tell you is that in the current reality, 85% of employers will wage a anti-union campaigns when a union drive is discovered. These campaigns are nothing more than campaigns, often with the implied threat of job loss, to frighten workers into not using their rights in the work place. An anti-union campaign is the bosses effort to convince a group of workers that they are better off letting the employer make all the decisions about the professional fate and work place welfare for the employee. This much is implied in the Biz Press, a S. Cal business interest paper...

Bobby Spiegel, president and CEO of the Corona Chamber of Commerce, said,..."We feel the measure would actually cause less choice for employees and lead to more intimidation by labor unions," ...

Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Santa Clarita and senior minority member of the House Education and Labor Committee, described card check as "unfair to workers," according to a committee spokeswoman.

The congressman was concerned that removing the secret ballot could lead to intimidation by both sides..."

Ok, lets not have more intimidation, lets have less intimidation. Or how about this, lets try no intimidation. My boss is not allowed to talk to me about who he thinks I should vote for in a Presidential election while I am on the job because it might be intimidating. Why are employers allowed to advise me that I should waive my right to collective bargaining while I am on the clock, at mandatory meetings? There already is intimidation and almost all of it comes from the boss.