Monday, February 6, 2012

For First Time in 10 Years, GE Workers Vote in Union


Congratulations to our brothers and sisters in Kansas City on their impressive victory against a huge anti-union GE in KC!
 
Working in These Times
Monday Feb 6, 2012 3:11 pm
By Mike Elk
 
If you scan the resumes of corporate executives on LinkedIn, you can identify who has attended General Electric’s union avoidance courses. GE's  Union Avoidance Department, headed by Mark Guthrie, is known to be one of the most effective anti-labor departments in American. Unions almost never win elections at the company.
So it's surprising that a group of workers at GE Transportation in Kansas City, Mo., recently voted 44-41 to join IBEW Local 1464. It was the first time that a union had organized a GE bargaining unit in 10 years; the last was a small service shop in Florida containing a dozen workers. According to the IBEW, it was the first time anyone has organized a large-scale GE facility in 20 years.
The key to this success seems to be workers' perseverance. Despite three previous failed attempts in four years to organize the plant, workers strategically countered the talking points of GE’s anti-union campaign. In 2010, workers at the Kansas City plant attempted to organize a union with IBEW after seeing a worker die on the job in a horrific accident. But in a December 2010 election, pro-union workers lost by a mere 11 votes.
During the anti-union campaign of the 2010 election, GE promised workers that wages would increase significantly if they voted down the union. According to IBEW Local 1464 Lead Organizer Mike Knox, when the wage increase failed to happen as expected, many workers began to feel that the only way to improve wages was to unionize.
In response to the union drive, GE rolled out an intense anti-union drive, including captive audience meetings and one-on-one meetings between workers considering a union and their supervisors.
“The Volunteer Organizing Committee was very active. The company identified very quickly who were the union pushers and kept them separated from others workers,” says IBEW Local 1464 Business Manager Darrell McCubbins. “They were keeping them separated on overtime and shifts so that the younger second shift couldn’t talk to the older first shift.”
Through the Voluntary Organizing Committee, however, workers were able to maintain active communications between older more pro-union workers on the first shift and younger more scared workers on the second shift.
“I attended meetings with the daylight crew and some VOC members on daylight shift attended meetings with us,” says Jim Wasserman, a repairman who worked on the second shift. “We came to the same conclusion:  that GE hadn’t convinced us about what they were going to do to answer our problems.”
One of the biggest myths the Volunteer Organizing Committee had to dispel was that GE would close the plants if workers voted to unionize. According to Knox,  the committee argued to wary workers that GE in recent years had invested very heavily in the plant and was thus unlikely to close it.
 “A very effective campaign of hand billing was a key thing to our victory. We were able to use handbills to go down and counter point by point every inaccurate statement that company made  about the union,” says Knox. “Also, bringing in a worker from an IBEW-represented GE railroad plant also helped workers understand how the union would work for them. It was really important to have another GE worker there, especially an IBEW member who could speak their language.”
As a result of the efforts by IBEW Local 1464 and the Volunteer Organizing Committee, pro-union workers won the election by a slim margin of 44-41 in late January. But workers still have to fight to get GE to agree to a first contract; many companies refuse to agree to a first contract and instead push for decertification after one year.
“The workforce is still divided, and management is doing a good job of continuing to stir that up,” says IBEW Business Manager Darrell McCubbins.
On Friday, another group of GE workers—150 people at a facility in Burlington, Iowa— filed for a union election to be represented by IUE-CWA. According to IUE-CWA organizer Jim Latcher, workers at that facility who had previously tried to unionize unsuccessfully are upset by a 30 percent wage cut imposed on workers.

Friday, February 3, 2012

Wisconsin on Steroids? Arizona GOP Wants to Make State Most Anti-Union in Nation

The coordinated national attach on unions continues, despite the worker's victory in Ohio and a massive push back in Wisconsin that may result in Scott Von Walker's recall.  Indiana passed Right to Work (for less) just in time for the Super Bowl in Indianapolis (a shout out to the NFL Players Association for strongly supporting Indiana workers in their fight).  Watch for protesters amid all of the pre-game hoopla.  Now comes Arizona - a ban on public employee collective baragaining - even a ban on management talking to unions!  The corporate elite (including the Koch Brothers and their billionaire friends) are sure getting what they have paid for.  As bad as Missouri is, we haven't even broken into the top ten of union busting states.  Let's hope we don't.  One thing in our favor is a constitutional right to organize and bargain collectively through representatives of our own choosing.  The workers in Wisconsin and Arizona would love to have that constitutional right now.

BY ROGER BYBEE
Working In These Times 
FRIDAY FEB 3, 2012 1:30 PM

“Wisconsin on steroids” –a sweeping set of anti-union laws even more severe than those passed in Madison last March over massive public outcry—is now on the legislative agenda in Arizona. Arizona Republicans seek to ban local unions of teachers, firefighters, police, and other public servants from collective bargaining, and would even prohibit local officials from conferring with unions. These and other proposals set a new low in proposed restrictions on union rights.

The draconian package of bills includes:

A ban on local officials from bargaining with unions. It would even ban state and local units of government from conferring with unions.
Public employees could no longer have their dues deducted from their paychecks.
Enforcement of a “paycheck protection” plan making it harder for unions to get contributions for pro-labor candidates.
Prohibit local governments from granting release time for union activities, so that union leaders would have to use personal time to resolve issues with management.
“We consider this even worse than the [anti-public union] legislation that Gov. Walker pushed in Wisconsin, “said AFL-CIO Executive Director Rebeka Friend. She believes the new wave of legislation is aimed at preventing union members from speaking out against the privatization of public services in Arizona.

Privatization has long been a central goal of both the American Legislative Exchange Council (see here and here), a national group funded heavily by the billionaire Koch brothers that drafts and promotes state legislation, and the Arizona-based Goldwater Institute, an ALEC affiliate.

“This is a Goldwater Institute attack,” Friend explained. “They’re a think-tank very prominent in anti-union activities, and their main goal is privatizing public services.
We stand in the way of what they want because union members know what is needed for good public services,” she said. “Our members are a barricade to what ALEC and the Goldwater Institute want in terms of privatization. ... This legislation is for the corporate donors, not the taxpayers."

While victories for Gov.  Walker and others have come at a huge political cost, the Republicans have arch-conservative Jan Brewer as governor and super-majorities in both houses of the legislature. Walker now faces a recall election demanded by 1.1 million citizens, almost as many as voted for him in 2010. In Ohio, Gov. John Kasich was humiliated when the voters in November repealed his law effectively stripping public workers of their rights.

But that has not halted their zealous comrades in Indiana and Arizona from escalating the battle against worker rights. Much of the nation is comprised of states lacking the same strong union traditions of Wisconsin and Ohio that have persisted despite a decline in union membership.

Corporations and the Right are currently focusing on states with lower levels of union organization and the absence of other mass-based advocacy groups. Thus, last week anti-union Republican legislators in Indiana rammed through “right-to-work” legislation that will outlaw the union shop and drive more workers into poverty, a condition already shared by one of three Hoosiers. Gov. Mitch Daniels signed the law this week.

Arizona has long been a “right-to-work,” and state employees lack any rights to collectively bargain. Nonetheless, right-wing legislators have began a drive to totally silence the state’s small but vigorous labor movement in their drive for privatization.
AFSCME Local 2960 President Frank Piccioli tore into the legislation during a televised debate with a Republican legislator. Piccioli declared, “ The senator is trying to destroy representation for the middle class.”

After quoting Ronald Reagan—who at one time was elected president of the Screen Actors Guild union—asserting that freedom cannot exist where unions are banned, Piccioli laid out a strong appeal to Arizona's broader public:

They’re trying to destroy representation for firefighters, police, for 911 responders and teachers. Instead of going after the CEOs and banks that caused our problems, they’re trying to shift the blame to public employees.

The Goldwater Institute’s Nick Granias was remarkably frank in explaining how the legislation would cripple public unions so members would then seem them as useless. As Talking Points memo stated:

Granias said the measures were inspired by Wisconsin but were more modeled after legislation passed in Virginia about 30 years ago. He said the goal of the measures wasn’t to ban public unions from Arizona but to make them seem obsolete.

“Gradually this would cause people to leave the unions as they recognized that unions no longer have an unfair bargaining advantage given to them by collective bargaining laws,” Dranias said. “They’ll realize that unions don’t do much for them.”

But Friend, Piccioli and the labor movement of Arizona believe that the Republican legislators are targeting a highly popular segment of the population: police officers, firefighters, teachers and first responders, among others.

The Republicans are also overtly standing with the richest 1% at a time when unemployment remains relatively high, Arizona is troubled by one of the nation's worst foreclosure rates, and the state is marked by vivid contrasts between the lives of the elite and the vast majority.

Within the next two weeks, Friend will be summoning AFL-CIO members and allies to the state capitol to try to stop the current anti-union wave sweeping across the country from dealing another blow.

Thursday, January 12, 2012


This is NOT what democracy looks like.  Indiana Republicans are going for an end run around any opposition as they ram through their right-to-work for less bill.

Labor Readies Goal-Line Stand Against Right-to-Work in Indiana

 

Working in These Time
January 11, 2012
By Roger Bybee

Indiana is now Ground Zero for the national battle between the top 1% and the vast majority in the closely interwoven struggles over the future of democracy, the rights of workers and economic justice in America.
The next week or so may determine whether Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and allied Republican legislators, who dominate both houses of the state legislature, succeed in passing the first “right to work” law in a northern industrial state.
A committee of Indiana state lawmakers advanced the controversial "right to work" legislation to the House of Representatives in an 8-5 party line vote Tuesday Morning.   House Democrats had ended a three-day long boycott of the bill Monday, but House Democratic Leader Patrick Baur said they may boycott again to stop the bill from advancing, according to Politico. Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma said the bill could advance to the GOP-controlled Senate as early as Friday. Republicans, who control the house 60-40, need two-thirds of their members to vote for the measure.

The legislation, which would ban companies and unions from requiring nonunion members to pay for union representation, has been bitterly contested between Republicans and Democrats. Protesters against the bill heckled Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels' final "State of the State" address Tuesday night at the Indiana Statehouse, while many of the Democrats' seats were empty as a form of protest. If "right to work" is approved, Indiana would become the 23rd state to approve the ban, and the first in over a decade.
“Multinational corporations and the Right are pulling out all the stops trying for a win in Indiana with ‘right-to-work’ legislation after they’ve been hit with setbacks in New Hampshire, Wisconsin, and Ohio,” explained Jeff Smith, communications director of the Indiana AFL-CIO.
The anti-labor initiatives launched so boldly a year ago by Republicans elected in the 2010 sweep have splintered after crashing into the rocks of deeply-felt public support for labor rights.
On November 8, the Right was shaken by the overwhelming 61% vote repealing Ohio’s revocation of public-worker union rights. Zealous GOP advocates of “right-to-work” legislation in New Hampshire were unable to overcome a veto by the Democratic governor. In Wisconsin, Gov. Scott Walker and Republican legislators ignited a massive labor uprising as they trampled basic democratic procedures in winning a virtual ban on public-worker union representation.
But Walker and others in Wisconsin are now facing near-certain recall elections, with a set of scandals—most recently, the arrest of Walker appointees in Milwaukee County accused of stealing money from a fund for wounded veterans—further undermining public support.
Now activists on the Right are moving "right-to-work" legislation forward rapidly before public awareness becomes consolidated against it. The heavy financial advantages of the corporate side are drowning out democratic dialogue in Indiana, substituting a blitzkrieg of TV ads for thorough consideration of how right-to-work laws impact a state’s quality of life.
As studies cited by the New York Times Steven Greenhouse indicate, "right-to-work" laws banning the union shop give employers leverage to weaken existing unions by favoring anti-union nonmembers and to disccourage further unionization. Indiana's current situation would seem to provide all the evidence one needs to demonstrate that the state needs more—not fewer—high-wage, unionized jobs to combat growing poverty:
One in three Hoosiers qualifies as low-income now, compared with one in four a decade earlier. And 58 percent of unemployed Indianans have burned through their benefits...
Workers here have done a backward slip-slide for more than a decade. Median income is falling — by 15 percent in the last decade. The so-called real unemployment rate, which includes those too discouragedto look for work, stood at 17.4 percent last year. And the percentage of Indianans who participate in the work force has dropped in the past two years, much faster than in Illinois and Ohio to the east....
In 2010, wages of workers in unionized manufacturing companies in Indiana were 16 percent higher than in nonunion plants.
Against this backdrop, even the advantages of having a right-wing Republican governor, a 60-40 GOP advantage in the House, and a 37-13 majority in the Senate are not enough to guarantee victory for the right-to-work bill.
Taking advantage of the unlimited corporate spending and removal of public-disclosure requirements enabled by the U.S. Supreme Court’s highly unpopular 2010 Citizens United ruling, the “right-to-work” forces in Indiana are blanketing the state with $600,000 in ads by the shadowy Indiana Opportunity Fund.
The Opportunity Fund is headed up by attorney James Bopp, Jr., who served as one of the lawyers arguing for the removal of constraints on campaign spending for the tycoons gathered in the Citizens United organization. For those seeking to secure the privileged position of the top 1% in Indiana and across America, it is not sufficient for corporations to have a 15-1 spending advantage over labor as they did in the 2008 federal elections.
Daniels, Bopp, and the Opportunity Fund are unwilling to provide the Indiana public with the opportunity to judge their message by considering what their contributors seek to gain. This refusal to reveal donors has triggered widespread calls in numerous newspaper editorials and by civic groups for full disclosure of the list of funders.
Daniels' legacy
Gov. Daniels’ first act in office in 2005 was to issue an executive order wiping out the collective bargaining rights of public employees, in a move apparently aimed at luring a heavily subsidized Honda plant to a nearly all-white, anti-union region of the state.
That was followed up by the enactment later in 2005 of a highly restrictive voter identification bill that suppresses the votes of unwelcome parts of the electorate, such as African Americans, students, the elderly and the poor, all of whom are likely to lack official photo IDs like a driver’s license or passport. (Indiana was unable to document a single case of voter fraud in persuading the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold the law.)
In 2011, huge throngs of unionists and supporters, estimated at about 75,000, staged rallies inside and outside the Indiana State Capitol against an earlier version of the right-to work bill. At the same time, Democratic members of the House—much like 14 Democratic senators in Wisconsin—took refuge outside the state in order to deny a quorum on the right-to-work bill. Eventually, RTW supporters were forced to back off temporarily.
This time around, the Republicans believe that they have adopted cures for the displays of democratic dissent that disrupted their right-to-work offensive last year. The Republicans won passage of “anti-bolting” penalties of $1,000 per day against legislators who might consider adopting the same tactic of fleeing the state again.
Most recently, the Daniels administration enacted new rules restricting the number of people allowed into the Capitol and even restricted the size of signs. But following a firestorm from across the political spectrum—from the Tea Party to the American Civil Liberties Union, Daniels and his staff backed off at least temporarily from putting the rules into effect, but may still invoke them.
“They had hoped to get the bill passed last week, and were trying to get the most controversial legislation in the last decade passed within two or three days,” AFL-CIO’s Smith said. “But we’ve had 17,000 union members and supporters showing up on the first three days of the new legislative session, and with thousands coming every day,” Smith reported.
"We’ve had phone banks calling our members and the public, and members going door-to-door asking people to call their legislators. “There’s now a good number of Republicans who are saying that they can’t vote for it.”
Appparently, if the bill is passed, Daniels and his allies envision the Feb. 5 Super Bowl as a chance to publicize their success in crushing worker rights—or, alternately, distracting from citizens' outcry.
But the NFL Players Association has already issued a strong statement denouncing the proposal, and any major delays this month would give Indiana labor an unprecedented worldwide audience for its goal-line stand against the bill.

Monday, January 9, 2012

Board OKs collective bargaining, ballot issues

After over four years of struggle, the teachers in the Columbia School District can finally have a vote to elect an exclusive representative.  Yes!

 Columbia Tribune
By CATHERINE MARTIN
Published January 9, 2012

The Columbia Board of Education approved collective bargaining policies Monday, including one that calls for teachers to elect an exclusive representative.

Policy HA was approved outlining the process of collective bargaining, and Policy HH calls for an exclusive representative.

The district previously did not have a collective-bargaining policy and instead used a “meet-and-confer” approach. In May 2007, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that public employees, including teachers and educational support staff, have a constitutional right to collectively bargain. Teachers can request to exercise that right at any time, and that prompted the district to consider adopting a policy.

The two polices were approved with a 5-1 vote, with Board Member Jan Mees voting in opposition to the policies. Board member Michelle Pruitt was absent from the meeting.

Members of the Columbia Missouri State Teachers Association, including a few who spoke up Monday night, have repeatedly objected to an exclusive representation policy, citing fears that their voices would be left out if another group was elected as representative.

“When our policy … has the option for exclusive representation, we’re setting up a precedent where we automatically rule out some voices,” said Marilyn Andre, CMSTA liaison to the board.

Superintendent Chris Belcher stressed that ultimately the decision will still be up to the teachers through a vote. He emphasized that the policy is not calling for the creation of unions of exclusive representation but is only outlining a process for collective bargaining if teachers were to ask for that right.

The board also approved two items to go on the April ballot – a 40-cent tax levy increase and a $50 million bond issue, which would likely mean a 12-cent tax increase.

Funds from the bond issue would be used to pay for facilities such as an additional new elementary school, which would likely open in 2016, an early childhood center and additions to existing schools, such as Shepard Boulevard and West Boulevard elementary schools. Altogether the projects would eliminate at least 28 classroom trailers.

The bond issue is part of a 10-year long-range plan that accounts for growth and would eliminate all trailers from the district by 2020.

“We know we want to be out of the business of trailers,” board member Jonathan Sessions said. “We know they are inefficient. We know they are breaking down. We want our students in bricks-and-mortar buildings.”

The tax levy would go toward operation costs such as salaries and programs.

“We’ve talked about this for two years, and I think a 40-cent increase is necessary to maintain and sustain the programs we have,” Belcher said.

http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2012/jan/09/board-oks-teacher-collective-bargaining-policies/