Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Dems introduce Employee Free Choice Act today--does it have a snowball's chance of passing?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Unsane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:27 PM
Original message
Dems introduce Employee Free Choice Act today--does it have a snowball's chance of passing?
Edited on Tue Mar-10-09 10:30 PM by Unsane
It will get through the House, but I feel like Reid will sit on it. If Senate Dems hold strong and Franken is seated, Reid would only need one republican on board. The problem is some Senate Dems, see Blanche Lincoln et al, seem waffly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. by definition Reid isn't sitting on it
as you said, it was introduced today. Much earlier than I expected. Obama hinted that it wouldn't be introduced til next year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unsane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. You think it has a shot?
Without getting cut up, watered down, and neutered?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. yes I think it has a shot
if Obama spends some political capital and we all call our senators.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rwheeler31 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
2. We may have to wait for Al.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Double T Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
4. Hope not. We've seen what greedy unions and their arrogance.........
can do to their own place of employment. Workers rights can be legislated without the installation of unions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Unions Suck
Edited on Tue Mar-10-09 10:42 PM by MannyGoldstein
less than any other alternative.

Particularly when there's an oversupply of labor, as there is now, only unions can maintain reasonable wages. When unions are healthy, the middle class flourishes. As unions are busted, the middle class is also busted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Double T Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. unions will insure more outsourcing to foreign nations.
Guaranteed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Not If We Enact Tariffs Against Micro-Wage Nations
As the Europeans have done. And, lo and behold, their middle class is doing far better than ours.

There is no way on God's green earth that any American labor, union or non-union, can compete with people making $2 a day. The Clintons and anyone else who spins the fantasy that we can compete against that without tariffs is, at best, insane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 03:15 AM
Response to Reply #13
31. They also have higher unemployment rates than we do
Edited on Wed Mar-11-09 03:19 AM by Hippo_Tron
But I agree that unions are important. The free market system sets wages based on the idea that labor is a commodity which is fine when you are just considering the welfare of a business but not the welfare of a society. Collective bargaining is a way that we can increase the welfare of society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 06:59 AM
Response to Reply #31
37. They Measure Unemployment Differently Than We Do
If we measure the same way, our numbers are similar. Also, their unemployment is clustered at young workers - those who usually don't have dependents (yet).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Juche Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. Many jobs that will be unionized will be service jobs
Edited on Tue Mar-10-09 10:51 PM by Juche
How can you outsource service jobs? Walmart and Burger King need workers here in the US. Service is not manufacturing.

Not only that, but outsourcing doesn't save as much money as many people think. Even when it works (and it often doesn't) you only save about 5-15% because labor is a small price of total expenses in running a business.

Combine that with a growing economy in China, devaluation of the dollar, increase in value of the yuan, high shipping and management costs when outsourcing and growing wages, quality control costs & environmental protections in china and we should still be cost competitive even with unions driving up wages & benefits by 20-30%.

I agree with you that labor laws can drive up business costs. But I disagree on the outcome. For one thing, that means more money for workers to buy things rather than seeing 90% of the economic growth go to the wealthy. With a strong union movement we can rebuild the middle class, and since 70% of our economy is consumerism that can't be ignored. Also alot of jobs that need unions are service jobs that cannot be outsourced. Nurses assistant, fast food worker, retail store worker, etc.

I also think that instead of worrying about jobs being shipped to China because we enact labor laws, we should pressure CHina to enact labor laws of their own. Make capitalism a non zero sum game. Rather than race to the bottom to see which country can offer the lowest wages and worst working conditions, fight to pressure China to allow more labor reform so they can drive their own wages up too. Then outsourcing is less cost effective.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #10
17. Only if your a Banker
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #10
22. So, you want a spiral of wage deflation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Double T Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Globalization wasn't my idea and I'm adamantly opposed to it.
Like it or not, wage deflation is here to stay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. I suppose you think worker safety and environmental laws are detrimental
to economic development as well?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Double T Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #26
29. Worker Safety and Environmental Laws DO NOT require Unions.
Stepped up OSHA program with oversight and stricter EPA rules, regulations with oversight can handle the job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 06:34 AM
Response to Reply #29
36. OSHA compliance still has the effect of raising labor costs above what they
are in the third world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #10
25. We Need to Export Unions Too Then
Let the unions become the INTERNATIONAL organizations they claim to be!
That is the only way to stop workers of one nation being played off against another.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. I have advocated this for a long time. We need to create an international
union system that coordinates between countries. Corporations have outfoxed unions on this front so far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 03:23 AM
Response to Reply #10
32. The aggregate number of jobs in the US wasn't a serious problem until the financial crisis
There were plenty of jobs in the US, they were just not good paying jobs. Unions mean fewer jobs with higher wages. Fewer jobs with higher wages is good for society when you have people working 2 or 3 of those jobs to make ends meet.

Now granted with the financial crisis we have 7% unemployment and ideally that needs to come down and it will eventually. In the long run, though, we don't want to return to where we were just before the crisis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dcindian Donating Member (881 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 06:33 AM
Response to Reply #10
35. Bull shit
Every sector is hit every single one. This such utter bull shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #10
40. Why have non-union firms outsourced more than unionized firms?
You're spreading more nonsense!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. I haven't seen that
in my experience unions have been unqualifiedly a positive in the workplace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Double T Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Try working with union members in some workplaces; it's like working with a bunch.......
of spoiled rotten whiny kids.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Ya - they keep insisting on a Safe Work place
How dare they
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. that doesn't match my experience at all
in my experience the unions don't change the workers at all, they change the management.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snowbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 03:02 AM
Response to Reply #12
30. I wouldn't trade my union for anything...
.
.

And I'm not a spoiled rotten anything!

So you're anti-union. That's YOU.

You don't have to broadbrush all unions and try to push your own negative opinion of them on the rest of us.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. Yes - Horrible things like ....
Holidays
Safe Work Evironment
40 hour work week
Pension Plans
Healthcare benefits
Sick Leave
Over Time Pay

Its just scary to think what unions may do next
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #14
20. you mean those things didn't come from the kindness in employers' hearts?
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. Nor from Anti-union RATpubliCON Propaganda
Some folks honestly believe working for the company store on starvation wages is a good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojambo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
6. My guess is that it'll be passed in name only.
Any provisions useful to actual working people will have to go.

And most Senate Democrats will have no problem going along.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:34 PM
Response to Original message
7. I am manning my phones tomorrow
the leaders of labor today were quite clear

This doesn't pass... there goes labor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Juche Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:43 PM
Response to Original message
11. No
Without Franken seated that is only 58. I don't even know if Kennedy is back yet either, so it may only ben 57 dems in the senate.

Nope.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 07:00 AM
Response to Reply #11
38. We may be able to swing Specter here in PA, that might be enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Juche Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #38
39. That would still only be 58 w/o franken & kennedy
If we tried to get EFCA passed in may or june I think it could be done, but not now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marsala Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:52 PM
Response to Original message
19. Specter voted for it the last time around, didn't he?
That's at least 1 likely Republican vote. But it isn't enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 10:59 PM
Response to Original message
21. Ben Nelson of Nebraska doesn't support it of course. I knew
he wouldn't. This red state hates unions. I cannot wait to get the hell out of here. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #21
28. Ben Nelson is a waste at times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 03:30 AM
Response to Original message
33. I have a suggestion for how to hold Blanche Lincoln
Edited on Wed Mar-11-09 03:38 AM by Hippo_Tron
I think her hesitance is that Wal-Mart is such a large employer in the state. So put a provision in the bill that the government will give a tax break to Costco for opening up a location in every store where Wal-Mart shuts down. It gets Lincoln on board and then puts Wal-Mart in a worse bargaining position.

But in all seriousness it has very little chance of passing in original form. Thanks the US Senate for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLAprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-11-09 05:47 AM
Response to Original message
34. nope -- thanks to the dim bulb Arkansas senators and the dimmer bulb Ben Nelson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 08:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC