In what some are calling a “preemptive strike” against the unpaid union debts owed by the new administration, a bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives that would shoot down the legitimacy of any union where a secret ballot vote to organize hasn’t taken place.
H.R. 1176 is a Very Good Thing, no matter how much union leaders and beholden Democrats might whine. You see, the human being is, for most intents and purposes, very much a herd kind of critter, a “sheeple”, if you will. Finding safety in numbers, they are hard-pressed to make a solo stand against the perceived opinions of the majority, especially when the majority happens to be their own flock. P.T. Barnum is famous for his exploitation of this idea; union organizers (and most used-car salesmen) know it, too. The “crowd mentality” is exploited on a daily basis by advertisers and others with good or not-so-good intentions every day. Heck, it’s pretty much the way Congress does business.
But a truth is that what people say in front of members of their flock in order to be seen as “going along” and what they really believe are often two very different things. And it is to protect that free will choice to cast ballots in secrecy and anonymity for which this bill is designed. Intimidation and coersion have no place in business; they have no business any place, for that matter.
While I am on the record as being no fan of big government, the right to choose union representation freely is one fundamental right that should be set down and made clear once and for all.
Kudos to the 103 co-sponsors on record. It’s pathetic to see that there isn’t a single Democrat – those self-annointed “defenders” of the “little people” – among the lot. Not even one those still in Congress who once told the Mexican government (in writing): “We understand that the secret ballot is allowed for, but not required, by Mexican labor law. However, we feel that the secret ballot is absolutely necessary in order to ensure that workers are not intimidated into voting for a union they might not otherwise choose.”
[…] It is a dastardly bit of legislative payback by the union-owing President that allows the ever-decreasing unions to strong-arm their way into increasing membership through covert and what will assuredly also be overt intimidation. Peer-pressure is not something to underestimate but by taking away the right to a private vote for unionization, the President is ursupping one of America’s basic rights. […]