Skip to comments.Unions Request a "Do-Over" in Failed Chattanooga Union Vote
Posted on 03/11/2014 12:33:45 PM PDT by Kaslin
What do you do when a union vote doesnt go your way? Well, if you are the United Auto Workers union, you ask for a re-do. The UAW has asked the National Labor Relations Board to reconsider their failed attempt to unionize Volkswagen workers in Chattanooga, because Well because they think it was unfair that anti-union voices were allowed to make their case on TV, highway billboards, and newspaper columns. In other words: the UAW feels they were unfairly outgunned by free-speech.
According to the Wall Street Journal:
The UAW has filed an election objection with the labor board alleging that Republican politicians conducted a coordinated and widely-publicized coercive campaign to deprive workers of their federally-protected right to support and select the UAW as their exclusive representative.
Um What about the federally protected right to free speech? Or does that pesky First Amendment not really apply to Republicans? The union feels as if the anti-unionization case made by outside parties (without the authorization, or endorsement of Volkswagen) constitutes an interference in the vote Its a pretty audacious claim, when one considers that the victim in this case is one of the nations most powerful lobbying and fundraising instrument for progressive causes.
Apparently, the UAW is under the impression that folks like Grover Norquist, Senator Bob Corker, and Republican backed activist groups used intimidation to compel workers to vote against the unionization of VWs Chattanooga plant. The claim is pretty rich, coming from an organization that has showed strong solidarity with unions that post the names of Michigan workers who opted out of union contracts. Its kinda like Al Capone complaining that Elliot Ness is too intimidating; then appealing for a re-trial on tax evasion.
Union President Bob King said that its an outrage that politically motivated third parties threatened the economic future of this facility and the opportunity for workers to create a successful operating model that that would grow jobs in Tennessee. (Right Because Motor Citys bankrupt auto manufacturers are such successful operating models.) Well, Bob, thats one interpretation of what happened. Other people, like the 712 workers who voted against the union, might say that such opposition forces were expressing legitimate concerns over unionization.
I mean, heck, only 7 percent of the private workforce is currently unionized Couldnt it just be that workers in Tennessee didnt feel like paying union dues to a Democrat fundraising outfit (cleverly disguised as a labor union)?
Of course, the request for an election re-do is only the latest episode in the unions temper-tantrum. The eerily Marxist website, workers.org (seriously their motto is workers of the world unite, and their logo is a big red star... Joe McCarthy would have a heart attack...), immediately claimed that the vote to remain union-free was inspired mostly by southern racism. Their reasoning was built on the foundation that southerners generally oppose abortion-rights, gun control, and other liberal causes. Apparently, concern over your union dues being used to promote liberal causes is racist Congratulations Tennessee: You all cling to guns, religion, and antipathy toward people who are not like you. (Have we heard that line before?)
The real reason people in Chattanooga didnt seem thrilled about unionizing: Detroit. Oh, and maybe workers dont like the idea of compulsory donations to the Democrat Party.
Apparently calling scabs and non-union workers a bunch of racist morons is not intimidation But going on public television and expressing concern over the effects that unionization might have on the states ability to attract more manufacturing jobs is grounds for voiding inconvenient outcomes I think were starting to get the picture. (Conservatives are racist, and non-union workers are brainwashed subjects of massive voter intimidation But, yeah: Im the type of guy that wears a tin-foil hat.)
Basically, the UAW is upset because opposition voices were allowed to express their opinions (Gasp!). Heaven forbid workers be exposed to both sides of an argument!!!
By the way, VW stayed definitively neutral even pro-union at times. In fact, according to Forbes:
Although politicians were outspoken, Volkswagen remained neutral during the organizing campaign. It hopes to establish a European-style works council in Chattanooga, as it has at other plants around the world. Under U.S. labor law, however, that model of labor-management relations requires the existence of a union.
So Even though VW did its best to remain neutral despite its clear bias toward establishing a union presence the mere existence of anti-union commentary made the election unfair in the eyes of the union. (Maybe the UAW would like to adopt Harvard style censorship in lieu of the First Amendment?)
The UAWs tantrum, and subsequent request for a second vote, is yet another example of the Lefts intolerance for dissent. They call the opposition racist, and immediately request a rematch because their political opponents were allowed the opportunity to exercise freedom of speech.
The new slogan of the collectivist Left: Workers of the world unite! (So long as they unite in support of Democrat fundraising machines like the UAW.)
Labor union officials enjoy many extraordinary powers and immunities that were created by legislatures and the courts. Union officials claim to rely on the support of rank-and-file workers. Yet, they clamor in the political arena to secure and expand their government-granted powers, including the powers to shake down workers for financial support and even to wage campaigns of violent retaliation against non-union employees.
The following list of special privileges reveals the extent to which union bosses have rigged our nations labor laws in their favor.
Privilege #1: Exemption from prosecution for union violence.
The most egregious example of organized labors special privileges and immunities is the 1973 United States v. Enmons decision. In it, the United States Supreme Court held that union violence is exempted from the Hobbs Act, which makes it a federal crime to obstruct interstate commerce by robbery or extortion. As a result, thousands of incidents of violent assaults (directed mostly against workers) by union militants have gone unpunished. Meanwhile, many states also restrict the authority of law enforcement to enforce laws during strikes.
Privilege #2: Exemption from anti-monopoly laws.
The Clayton Act of 1914 exempts unions from anti-monopoly laws, enabling union officials to forcibly drive out independent or alternative employee bargaining groups.
Privilege #3: Power to force employees to accept unwanted union representation.
Monopoly bargaining, or exclusive representation, which is embedded in most of the countrys labor relations statutes, enables union officials to act as the exclusive bargaining agents of all employees at a unionized workplace, thereby depriving employees of the right to make their own employment contracts. For example, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) of 1935, the Federal Labor Relations Act (FLRA) of 1978, and the Railway Labor Act (RLA) of 1926 prohibit employees from negotiating their own contracts with their employers or choosing their own workplace representatives.
Privilege #4: Power to collect forced union dues.
Unlike other private organizations, unions can compel individuals to support them financially. In 26 states under the NLRA (those that have not passed Right to Work laws), all states under the RLA, on exclusive federal enclaves, and in many states under public sector labor relations acts, employees may be forced to pay union dues as a condition of employment, even if they reject union affiliation.
Privilege #5: Unlimited, undisclosed electioneering.
The Federal Election Campaign Act exempts unions from its limits on campaign contributions and expenditures, as well as some of its reporting requirements. Union bigwigs can spend unlimited amounts on communications to members and their families in support of, or opposition to, candidates for federal office, and they need not report these expenditures if they successfully claim that union publications are primarily devoted to other subjects. For years, the politically active National Education Association (NEA) teacher union has gotten away with claiming zero political expenditures on its IRS tax forms!
Privilege #6: Ability to strong-arm employers into negotiations.
Unlike all other parties in the economic marketplace, union officials can compel employers to bargain with them. The NLRA, FLRA, and RLA make it illegal for employers to resist a unions collective bargaining efforts and difficult for them to counter aggressive and deceptive campaigns waged by union organizers.
Privilege #7: Right to trespass on an employers private property.
The Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932 (and state anti-injunction acts) give union activists immunity from injunctions against trespass on an employers property.
Privilege #8: Ability of strikers to keep jobs despite refusing to work.
Unlike other employees, unionized employees in the private sector have the right to strike; that is, to refuse to work while keeping their job. In some cases, it is illegal for employers to hire replacement workers, even to avert bankruptcy. Meanwhile, union officials demonize replacement workers as scabs to set them up for retaliation.
Privilege #9: Union-only cartels on construction projects.
Under so-called project labor agreements, governments (local, state, or federal) award contracts for construction on major projects such as highways, airports, and stadiums exclusively to unionized firms. Such practices effectively lock-out qualified contractors and employees who refuse to submit to exclusive union bargaining, forced union dues, and wasteful union work rules. So far, just three states have outlawed these discriminatory and costly union-only pacts.
Privilege #10: Government funding of forced unionism.
On top of all of the special powers and immunities granted to organized labor, politicians even pour taxpayer money straight into union coffers. Union groups receive upwards of $160 million annually in direct federal grants. But thats just the tip of the iceberg. In 2001, the federal Department of Labor doled out $148 million for international labor programs overwhelmingly controlled by an AFL-CIO front group. Federal bureaucrats spend approximately $2.6 billion per year on job training programs that, under the Workforce Investment Act, must be administered by boards filled with union officials. Union bosses also benefit from a plethora of state and local government giveaways.
The workers at VW-Chattanooga did unite... and told the UAW to go pound sand.
Union is following standard protocol, happens all the time.
Let the American people have a do-over with Obama/Biden and the union can have their do-over.
“Unions Request a “Do-Over” in Failed Chattanooga Union Vote”
And this time...this time with more INTIMIDATION!!!
Standard leftist position - keep voting until you get the result you want. Then everything’s settled and no more votes are needed.
Agreed . . . IF we can have a “do-over” of the Congressional Obamacare vote. . . .
“DO OVER” ?
They just want another chance to do a better FIX on the vote count!!
The unions are run like commies run things. They are an embarrassment to themselves. Thugs.
“Keep voting, comrades, until we win!”
Another recall vote. How’d that work out for ya lately?
Keep voting till they win, then it’s settled law
Have they ever agreed to a do-over after winning?
A bunch of sniveling self serving RATS. WAH!
“And we’ll KEEP re-voting until you vote the way we WANT you to!”
I could agree with that.
As long as ALL election laws are vigorously enforced during each ‘do-over’.
honestly, i thought this article was sarcasm... like Semi-News, John Semmens...
Given the way the Tennessee legislature threatened VW and how Corker stuck his nose in I wouldn’t be surprised if they get a second vote. But what will the UAW do if they get even fewer votes the second time around? What will that do to them?
And you can bet that Obama’s thugs will be all behind this effort, seen and unseen.
Well, if “do overs” are allowed now, how about a “do over” on the last presidential election?
They will get their do-over.
The NRLB will impose Card Check rules.
The UAW will win.
They will try to sue Bob Corker.
United Auto Workers union cries Mommy to Labor Relations Board for a re-vote at Tennessee VW
No one likes a sore loser, but the United Auto Workers doesnt seem to care.
When two small groups of workers fought the unions intervention, the United Auto Workers and the Volkswagen Group of America immediately took offense. In a prepared statement, Volkswagen officials said the National Right to Work Foundation and Southern Momentum were unwarranted in their attempts to counter the United Auto Workers appeal.
The union argued that the two groups lacked jurisdiction to intercede, since neither was a labor organization or a party to the election.
Since VW wanted the Union, then the Union’s stance is there should have been no campaigning against the referendum by anybody, not even workers who opposed the Union. That seems to be the rationale, and Obastard’s NLRB will probably find for the Union and call another election.
Why not just have Obama decide how the election should have gone?
Why - did someone break a few arms or something...........
The NLRB is heavily biased in favor of the union, so they will get their do-over. They will be given all the time they want to seed their propaganda and flip some votes in the meantime. Don’t know if VW is still expanding and hiring but they will assume that newer workers are more pro-union so they will delay the vote until more workers are hired.