It appears that Republican Senators have convinced their fellow colleague, Arlen Specter, to vote against the card check legislation working its way through Congress. While I personally believe this is the right thing when it comes to helping American suppliers to remain competitive and to preserve sourcing options, there's also a more pragmatic argument against Card Check -- it limits choice. Consider this story from Fox News that highlights the potential for intimidation under a non-secret ballot program at a Dana Plant in Indiana. According to the story, "workers at the Dana Corporation Auto Parts plant in Albion, Ind., say the card check process has nearly torn the 50-person plant apart after harassment and intimidation from the United Auto Workers union forced them to a secret-ballot vote."
The story notes that, "A union organizer came to the plant two years ago to ask employees to join the UAW because the company had signed a neutrality agreement with the union." This organizer used "rough language -- cursing" and then approached workers "in the break room, at the plant doors and even followed them to their cars." One worker noted "He was just like an itch that you couldn't scratch. He just wouldn't go away." Another suggested that "After a while we realized he was going to be here morning, noon and night until he got his numbers that he needed." Some employees were even approached at home and "The union's relentless approach eventually wore" some down. "When they approach you every day -- every day, every day... after a while it's like Okay. Fine. I'll sign the card." Let me ask: is this an employee choice act? Or is it an intimidation act designed to coerce union membership at the expense of the rights of individual workers -- not to mention the rights of procurement and supply chain organizations to make the best possible sourcing and make/buy decisions.
- Jason Busch