Posts tagged secret-ballot election
Seattle Mariners Employee Fights Biden Labor Board Cemex Decision Upending Right to Vote in Secret on Union ‘Representation’
February 13, 2024 // Under Cemex, an employer who declines to recognize a union is required to quickly ask the NLRB to hold a secret ballot election. But the NLRB doesn’t have to grant that request. A union can easily prompt the NLRB to cancel an employee vote (or even overturn an election that doesn’t go in the union’s favor) by filing charges against the company and showing the employer committed an unfair labor practice during the “critical period” leading up to the election.
Opinion: Empowering worker autonomy: Resisting union pressure
February 8, 2024 // Neutrality agreements are hardly the only trick up the UAW’s sleeve. Unions frequently pressure employers to adopt card check as the preferred method for determining employee preferences regarding union representation, as opposed to a secret ballot election. In this process, workers are compelled to publicly declare their stance on unionization by either signing or refraining from signing “authorization” cards. Undue pressure, threats, and intimidation often result. Despite the reluctance of most employers to yield to union demands for card check, certain unions, including the UAW in Washington, DC, are advocating for new legislation mandating employers to accept card check. Moreover, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently issued a decision that could potentially eliminate elections in favor of authorization cards in a broader range of circumstances.
Commentary: States should protect workers from Democrats’ latest assault on their rights
January 19, 2024 // Ending the secret ballot is just one of the ways these Senate Democrats are trying to deprive workers of their rights. They ultimately want automakers to sign a so-called neutrality agreement. As I’ve documented, such agreements typically do three things. The first is to gut the secret ballot in favor of card check. Second, they give unions the personal information of every worker at a company — another violation of privacy and another invitation to intimidation. Finally, neutrality agreements put a gag order on companies, prohibiting them from talking to their workers about unionization. Yet that violates workers’ right to the full information they need to make the best choice. And that’s exactly why unions want to shut companies up — because it makes workers easier to control.
Pittsburgh Starbucks Workers Seek Vote to Remove Unwanted SBWU Union
July 14, 2023 // A contributing factor to the growing worker dissatisfaction with SBWU union officials may be the controversial practice of “salting,” which according to news reports is a tactic the SBWU union employed to install union power at New York Starbucks locations. “Salting” involves union officials surreptitiously paying union agents to obtain jobs at non-union workplaces to agitate for union control. “Salts” generally hide their union-allied status from both managers and their coworkers, and may quickly depart the workplace once a union has been installed. The New York Post reported that one SBWU union agent was paid nearly $50,000 to “salt” a Buffalo Starbucks location, and concealed her affiliation from both her coworkers and Congress.
Seneca Foods Employees Send Teamsters Union Officials Packing
April 3, 2023 // Seneca Foods employees in Oakfield, Wisconsin, have overwhelmingly voted to free themselves from the unwanted so-called “representation” of Teamsters Local 695. Andrew Collien, a warehouse employee at Seneca Foods, kick-started the decertification process that led to the workers’ vote to remove the union. Collien received free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. Collien and his coworkers filed the petition for a decertification vote with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in late February. In the petition, Seneca Foods workers formally requested a vote to determine whether or not the union should be removed. On March 30, the NLRB regional office conducted a secret ballot election at the plant, resulting in a 17-10 vote to remove the union. Union officials have seven days to file objections to seek to overturn the workers’ vote. Otherwise, the results will become final.
Secret ballot vital in union elections
February 17, 2023 // Consider one example from the public sector. In 2018, the US Supreme Court ruled in Janus v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees that public employees can’t be forced to join unions or pay union dues. The Commonwealth responded by passing legislation that allows public employee unions to agree to different terms for union members and non-members, giving unions the sole right to negotiate lesser pay and reduced benefits on behalf of the non-members. The law also promotes tried and true intimidation tactics by giving unions access to employees’ personal information, including home addresses; work, home, and personal cellphone numbers; along with work and personal email addresses. Anyone in Massachusetts public policy circles knows the Commonwealth’s unions aren’t interested in using that information to augment their holiday card lists.
Claiming ‘democracy under attack,’ Biden administration looks to make it harder to oust unions
November 7, 2022 // National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) announced it would start the process rescind a 2020 rule implemented to protect workers' right to vote on removing union representation. The NLRB adopted the Election Protection Rule in 2020 to reform several processes, including union officials filing "blocking charges" to prevent employees from voting out union representation from their workplace. Filing blocking charges by making one or multiple allegations against an employer prevents employees from voting, or their ballots are impounded because litigation ensues over the charges. This process often takes months or years to resolve, during which union representation and dues deductions continue.
Unions Are Adding Some Heat in the Kitchen for Food & Beverage Employers
July 27, 2022 // Food and beverage employers can take some important steps before a union-organizing effort that may not be available once an organizing drive begins. First, employers may want to establish effective lines of communication with their employees, including the utilization of a complaint procedure that is practical and efficient. Fostering a positive work culture that treats all employees with dignity and respect is crucial for maintaining effective communication. Second, employers may want to review their employee handbooks and related policies, such as open-door policies, solicitation policies, confidentiality policies, etc., to ensure they are up-to-date and legally compliant. Lastly, employers may want to consider training supervisors to identify and responding to union organizing in a lawful manner. Training can help avoid unfair labor practice charges that could result in significant costs for employers. food and beverage industry
Rep. Virginia Foxx: NLRB’s Bad Behavior
July 18, 2022 // “By eviscerating the secret ballot, a hallmark of democratic elections, card check makes workers more vulnerable to harassment from union organizers. Don’t forget, a prominent union leader testified before the House Education and Labor Committee that unions need workers’ personal information to harass them ‘at the grocery store,’ or in their own home to pressure them into supporting the union. His admission tells you all you need to know about the political hackery of unions today. “The Biden-appointed NLRB General Counsel has also challenged longstanding precedent regarding employers’ right to educate their employees about the downsides of union representation. General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo believes that such efforts are ‘at odds’ with the ‘fundamental labor laws’ of this country.