Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [WaitersWorld] "CARD CHECK" - U.S. Chamber, AOI sue state (Oregon) over new law

Expand Messages
  • Giuseppe
    Unions have worked hard with political baking (Democrata) to create a large body of workers, to create problems in the workforce historically, which is not
    Message 1 of 3 , Dec 23, 2009
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Unions have worked hard with political baking (Democrata) to create a large body of workers, to create problems in the workforce historically, which is not creative, or helpful to employees who wish to improve in life, and diminish workers ability to learn and raise higher in status,eg, how many unionist are self employed, or run a business, barely none because they are made to do minimal work badly, so that they don't have the ability to improve and have to rely on unions to support them, (goffers) Unions teach unionist all their rights, but what about the amount of work that they are supposed to do for their wages? there are no rules there, they are told to do as little as possible, People that hire people must have rights and protection from thugs, and workers should have a right to choose if they wish to join an organization or not. Giuseppe


      From: Mr Paul C. Paz
      Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 8:18 PM
      To: WaitersWorld
      Subject: [WaitersWorld] "CARD CHECK" - U.S. Chamber, AOI sue state (Oregon) over new law



      U.S. Chamber, AOI sue state over new law
      Portland Business Journal December 22, 2009
      http://portland.bizjournals.com/portland/stories/2009/12/21/daily19.html?ed=2009-12-22&ana=e_du_pub
      The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Associated Oregon Industries filed a lawsuit Tuesday, arguing that a new Oregon law unconstitutionally eliminates an employer’s right to conduct mandatory meetings with employees to rebut union rhetoric and provide information about the drawbacks of a unionized workplace.
      The law, known as SB 519, is scheduled to become effective Jan. 1. The case is Associated Oregon Industries and Chamber of Commerce of the United States v. Brad Avakian and Laborers’ International Union of North America, Local No. 296.
      “Organized labor hasn’t been able to muster the votes or the public support to pass card check, so they’ve moved on to ‘Plan B’ to muzzle employers during union organizing drives,” said Steven Law, chief legal officer and general counsel for the U.S.. Chamber, in a statement. “Just like card check, this law flies in the face of our country’s democratic values.”
      Card check is a process where employees sign authorization forms stating they wish to form or join a union.
      In its lawsuit, the chamber argues that federal law pre-empts the Oregon law, which runs counter to 50 years of federal protection for employers’ rights to hold mandatory meetings to rebut labor leaders’ rhetoric about unionizing. The chamber’s lawsuit also alleges that SB 519 violates employers’ speech rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.
      Oregon's AFL-CIO chapter called the lawsuit unfounded. The union claims such companies as Wal-Mart have called employee meetings to lobby workers to support certain political candidates.
      "Some employers seem to be threatened by the idea that they will no longer be able to fire or punish workers who don't want to sit down and listen to their opinions on non-work-related topics," said Tom Chamberlain, Oregon AFL-CIO president, in a statement. "But for too many years, Oregonians have felt threatened by their bosses telling them how to vote or what to believe. (The measure)is necessary, overwhelmingly supported by Oregonians, and legal."
      Oregon is the first state in the nation to pass such a law, which is based on model legislation drafted by the AFL-CIO. The AFL-CIO has introduced similar laws in numerous other states.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Giuseppe
      We need a body of fair and just people to to consider both sides, the Industry and the Employees it has to be balanced, the Union is not. Giuseppe From:
      Message 2 of 3 , Dec 23, 2009
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        We need a body of fair and just people to to consider both sides, the Industry and the Employees
        it has to be balanced, the Union is not. Giuseppe

        From: Giuseppe
        Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 9:04 PM
        To: WaitersWorld@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [WaitersWorld] "CARD CHECK" - U.S. Chamber, AOI sue state (Oregon) over new law



        Unions have worked hard with political baking (Democrata) to create a large body of workers, to create problems in the workforce historically, which is not creative, or helpful to employees who wish to improve in life, and diminish workers ability to learn and raise higher in status,eg, how many unionist are self employed, or run a business, barely none because they are made to do minimal work badly, so that they don't have the ability to improve and have to rely on unions to support them, (goffers) Unions teach unionist all their rights, but what about the amount of work that they are supposed to do for their wages? there are no rules there, they are told to do as little as possible, People that hire people must have rights and protection from thugs, and workers should have a right to choose if they wish to join an organization or not. Giuseppe

        From: Mr Paul C. Paz
        Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 8:18 PM
        To: WaitersWorld
        Subject: [WaitersWorld] "CARD CHECK" - U.S. Chamber, AOI sue state (Oregon) over new law

        U.S. Chamber, AOI sue state over new law
        Portland Business Journal December 22, 2009
        http://portland.bizjournals.com/portland/stories/2009/12/21/daily19.html?ed=2009-12-22&ana=e_du_pub
        The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Associated Oregon Industries filed a lawsuit Tuesday, arguing that a new Oregon law unconstitutionally eliminates an employer’s right to conduct mandatory meetings with employees to rebut union rhetoric and provide information about the drawbacks of a unionized workplace.
        The law, known as SB 519, is scheduled to become effective Jan. 1. The case is Associated Oregon Industries and Chamber of Commerce of the United States v. Brad Avakian and Laborers’ International Union of North America, Local No. 296.
        “Organized labor hasn’t been able to muster the votes or the public support to pass card check, so they’ve moved on to ‘Plan B’ to muzzle employers during union organizing drives,” said Steven Law, chief legal officer and general counsel for the U.S.. Chamber, in a statement. “Just like card check, this law flies in the face of our country’s democratic values.”
        Card check is a process where employees sign authorization forms stating they wish to form or join a union.
        In its lawsuit, the chamber argues that federal law pre-empts the Oregon law, which runs counter to 50 years of federal protection for employers’ rights to hold mandatory meetings to rebut labor leaders’ rhetoric about unionizing. The chamber’s lawsuit also alleges that SB 519 violates employers’ speech rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.
        Oregon's AFL-CIO chapter called the lawsuit unfounded. The union claims such companies as Wal-Mart have called employee meetings to lobby workers to support certain political candidates.
        "Some employers seem to be threatened by the idea that they will no longer be able to fire or punish workers who don't want to sit down and listen to their opinions on non-work-related topics," said Tom Chamberlain, Oregon AFL-CIO president, in a statement. "But for too many years, Oregonians have felt threatened by their bosses telling them how to vote or what to believe. (The measure)is necessary, overwhelmingly supported by Oregonians, and legal."
        Oregon is the first state in the nation to pass such a law, which is based on model legislation drafted by the AFL-CIO. The AFL-CIO has introduced similar laws in numerous other states.

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.