Union Organized With Less Than 30% of ‘Employees’ Agreeing to Representation?

[82Marine89]

LINK (http://www.therealitycheck.org/2007/12/08/union-organized-with-less-than-30-of-employees-agreeing-to-representation/)

The Associated Press (http://www.journalgazette.net/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071126/BIZ/711260328) brings us a doozie of a story about the creation of an entirely new area of union representation created in order to represent a workforce that mostly doesn’t even know they have a union in the first place. For that matter, this new union representation has a workforce the majority of which didn’t vote to join. This was one neat trick for the union, for sure. In essence the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) created a new branch of their union out of whole cloth with the approving nod of 11 Democrat state administrations.How did they do it? They sent a postcard in the mail and since a bunch came back saying they’d like the idea, wham-o-change-o a union was created out of thin air. But here is the thing: there was no vote, there were no mass meetings, there was no election of leadership… the unions just sent out a few postcards and decided they were now authorized to create a new union for a workforce that had no such union.

The SEIU has decided that in 11 states they now represent child-care providers that work out of their homes. Again, there were no meetings, there was no vote. Just some postcards.

In New York, for instance, the AP reports that this presumptuous new union organization represents 28,000 child-care providers. How did it happen? Well, see, the SEIU sent out postcards and got back 8,382 that said they wanted to join such a thing if it were to be created. So, as far as the SEIU is concerned with less than 30% of the 28,000 New York child-care providers saying it was a good idea that gives them the right to claim they are now representing ALL of the rest of them!

What gall!

[Joe Steel]

In New York, for instance, the AP reports that this presumptuous new union organization represents 28,000 child-care providers. How did it happen? Well, see, the SEIU sent out postcards and got back 8,382 that said they wanted to join such a thing if it were to be created. So, as far as the SEIU is concerned with less than 30% of the 28,000 New York child-care providers saying it was a good idea that gives them the right to claim they are now representing ALL of the rest of them!

What gall!


"...8,382 workers voting to join the United Federation of Teachers, and just 96 voting no" (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h_EJ-a6vaxHwN4VD0vGk5tJllKmAD8SRL7U00)

Clearly, it's what the child-care workers wanted.

What's your problem?

[Sitarro]

"...8,382 workers voting to join the United Federation of Teachers, and just 96 voting no" (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h_EJ-a6vaxHwN4VD0vGk5tJllKmAD8SRL7U00)

Clearly, it's what the child-care workers wanted.

What's your problem?

Try a little harder, that is 8,000 out of 28,000, although that would be a good enough percentage for you to think you have elected a President of your choice, it is still a very small minority coercing money from all. Unions SUCK.

[Joe Steel]

Try a little harder, that is 8,000 out of 28,000, although that would be a good enough percentage for you to think you have elected a President of your choice, it is still a very small minority coercing money from all. Unions SUCK.

Sorry, no.

If you don't vote, you're voting with the majority.

So it's really 27,904 to 96.

[Sitarro]

Sorry, no.

If you don't vote, you're voting with the majority.

So it's really 27,904 to 96.

Bullshit! I work for a company that a lousy union has been trying to infiltrate for 12 years. The vote is coming up and the only way to vote these leeches in is to vote yes, by not voting it is considered a no vote...... that is reality, not guessing.

[Hugh Lincoln]

The SEIU is the most hard-core socialist group in America. It is freakish. I'm not totally against unions, but they usually end up enriching the bosses and keeping the workers poor, and using workers' hard-earned money to fund the Democrats. What a crock.

[Mr. P]

they now represent child-care providers that work out of their homes.

Just try an collect dues from independent business...FUCKING CROOKS!

UNIONS SUCK!

[diuretic]

Playground time, "unons suck, unions suck, nyah, nyah."

Are we going to insult one another's choice of operating systems as well?

For crying out loud, get something writtern other than "unions suck", we might all appreciate opposing points of view. Yes, some unions are badly run, some are run for the glorification of the union management. Some. Which ones remain to be seen. I would think that many are properly run and are democratic organistions and not oligarchies (as are the worst unions).

But "unions suck" is childish.

[April15]

A union can only be as effective as it's membership. That goes for all aspects of the management of the union. Attending your locals meetings is a must if you want a good union that works for you, not by you.

[Joe Steel]

Bullshit! I work for a company that a lousy union has been trying to infiltrate for 12 years. The vote is coming up and the only way to vote these leeches in is to vote yes, by not voting it is considered a no vote...... that is reality, not guessing.

OK. Your election is rigged.

It happens.

[Joe Steel]

Just try an collect dues from independent business...

As I understand this situation, the child-care workers actually are paid by the State of New York. The State should be able to withhold union dues.

No problem.

[Mr. P]

Playground time, "unons suck, unions suck, nyah, nyah."

Are we going to insult one another's choice of operating systems as well?

For crying out loud, get something writtern other than "unions suck", we might all appreciate opposing points of view. Yes, some unions are badly run, some are run for the glorification of the union management. Some. Which ones remain to be seen. I would think that many are properly run and are democratic organistions and not oligarchies (as are the worst unions).

But "unions suck" is childish.

Actually here in the USA it's the truth. UNIONS SUCK!

[Joe Steel]

A union can only be as effective as it's membership. That goes for all aspects of the management of the union. Attending your locals meetings is a must if you want a good union that works for you, not by you.

That's right.

If you don't participate, you can't complain.

[Mr. P]

As I understand this situation, the child-care workers actually are paid by the State of New York. The State should be able to withhold union dues.

No problem.

Independent companies paid buy the state? If true, there's another problem.

[5stringJeff]

Playground time, "unons suck, unions suck, nyah, nyah."

Are we going to insult one another's choice of operating systems as well?

For crying out loud, get something writtern other than "unions suck", we might all appreciate opposing points of view. Yes, some unions are badly run, some are run for the glorification of the union management. Some. Which ones remain to be seen. I would think that many are properly run and are democratic organistions and not oligarchies (as are the worst unions).

But "unions suck" is childish.

Black and white avatars suck!!! :p :banana:

[diuretic]

A union can only be as effective as it's membership. That goes for all aspects of the management of the union. Attending your locals meetings is a must if you want a good union that works for you, not by you.

Good advice indeed. I did just that when I got sick and tired of the union (our union represents a single workforce in one department) and its laying down to be walked over by management. It took me 15 years but when I quit I was happy with the changes that I had helped (with others I hasten to add) achieve.

[diuretic]

Actually here in the USA it's the truth. UNIONS SUCK!

No colours? :laugh2:

[diuretic]

Black and white avatars suck!!! :p :banana:

It was cheap!!!! :laugh2: