From Mickey Kaus, more piercing of the arguments of organized labor for the Employee Free Choice Act. At Kausfiles:
A common tactic of card check proponents is to say that opponents aren’t really against the elimination of the secret ballot, they are really against unions. Hey, why can’t I be against both? There are two legit issues here: democratic principle and whether more American-style unionization is the answer to our economy’s problems. Yes, if there were a procedurally fair reform that promised to dramatically increase the unionization rate, I’d have a more difficult choice. But this isn’t that case. I’m willing to bet that a) workers who vote anonymously, free of the collective social pressure that can come with public voting, will rationally decide, often enough, that the drawbacks of unionization (in terms of the adversarialization of the workplace, lost productivity, and winding up like Detroit) outweigh the benefits, and b) workers who do decide to unionize their companies will find those companies losing out in the marketplace and shrinking (as has been the case, most conspicuously, with Detroit). … Bet (a), at least, is a bet Stern obviously doesn’t want to take–even though in the bhTV interview Reich is clearly, if timidly, trying to push him in the direction of a package of reforms aimed at curbing employer “coercion” rather than ending the secret ballot. … 7:54 P.M.
BHTV is Blogging Heads TV, and the specific interview of Stern by Robert Reich is here. Stern really is remarkably unpersuasive. Get him out there more!
Latest posts by Carter Wood (see all)
- Farewell from a Blogger - May 25, 2011
- Activist Ignore Evidence to Back Shakedown Suit Against Chevron - May 25, 2011
- More than a Lawsuit: A Circle of Political Pressure Against Chevron - May 25, 2011