Annoying: Rachel Maddow misleads about Employee Free Choice Act

Posted Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:28 pm

Just because I run a site about Air America doesn't mean I actually listen to them. So, it's understandable that I've only seen Rachel Maddow - now of MSNBC - two times. The first time was for a lightweight supposed "take down" of Pat Buchanan which was just a use of smears and innuendo rather than any sort of attempt to counter his points.

The second (and hopefully last) was from yesterday's broadcast of her TV show in which she discusses the Employee Free Choice Act, aka card check. As a solo host she falls completely flat, and it's possible to hear pins dropping all throughout her studio as she hectors members of her choir.

On the show she stresses that under card check (recent activity here) the secret ballot would still be available, and directs us to this Myth v. Fact page (edlabor.house.gov/employee-free-choice-act-myth-vs-fact/index.shtml). What neither she nor her guest Andy Stern mention is the scenario outlined by a commenter (yes, the commenter might be a plant) at politics.theatlantic.com/2009/03/employee_free_choice_act_fight_is_on.php:

Let's say there are 150 employees in a company and the union wants to organize there. They would need 76 signed cards (50%+1 of the employees) to be recognized. If they can identify 76 employees most likely to sign the cards-for any reason, union support, peer pressure, intimidation, not sure what they are really signing, etc.-the union never needs to approach the remaining 74 employees. If 76 employees sign the cards the entire 150 are now unionized. The 74 employees not informed of the union campaign are required to join and pay dues. Where's their "Choice?"

This site isn't coming down on either the side of the US Chamber of Commerce nor on the side of the leadership of the Service Employees International Union and other unions. It'd be nice if they both went away, but lacking that perhaps the Dems could come back with something that's at least slightly less of a sham.

12/23/11 UPDATE: The account associated with the previous video (Youtube ID PwJPKkXQk3g) was deleted. I attached another video of the segment, and the SEIU themselves have a video of the segment at ID 50H3II6MxbQ.

Tags: 
service employees international union
msnbc
andy stern
card check
rachel maddow

Comments

Ed Frank (not verified)

Wed, 03/11/2009 - 15:52

Rachel Maddow gets blown out of the water on this issue here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZkvNKy0tww

petty bourgeois (not verified)

Wed, 03/11/2009 - 19:08

She is a butch, angry lesbian, not very bright either, and hand picked by Keith Olbermann, who is another deranged lunatic. Why even bother watching?

jeff (not verified)

Fri, 03/13/2009 - 22:46

Yes and no. On the one hand, it is true that through authorization only 76 signatories would be needed and could be the only contacts. While this is a wildly impossible scenario, we will leave that aside (the idea that you would be able to approach 76 people and get a yes from everyone is not reality based). However, you are incorrect that the other 74 would be forced to "join" the union. Accoding to the NLRB - grounded in federal statute - employees can opt out of a bargaining unit (aka a union). They are called an agency fee payer or part of an "agency shop." As a non-member, however, they are forced to pay a fee, close to a union due, because they are accruing material and employment benefits on behalf of the union. In some instances an employer can negotiate a "one in ten" rule whereby one out every ten can automatically opt out of the union. Error aside, the whole premise here is silly. You are decrying the problem that not everyone gets a "choice." Fair enough. But current rules dont require everyone's consent. NLRB "secret ballot" rules dont require everyone to vote and often not all employees vote, for a variety of reasons. And, the protestations about employees "not sure what they are signing" is not true. The legislation mandates that cards explicitly state, boldly, what the card is for. So your objections to the EFCA - that not everyone has a say - exists precisely the same under current rules. Further, employees decertify from a union not by "secret ballot" but by authorization card signings. Thus 'card check' is the exact same mechanism for joining a union as ridding of it. But back to the beginning, your plant's scenario has no basis in reality.