Organizepro5/17/2023 ![]() ![]() Even though Amazon lost that argument, it persuaded the US Postal Service to install a mailbox at the Bessemer facility, and there is evidence that Amazon representatives had keys to the mailbox – thus undermining any notion of a free, secret ballot election for workers. Amazon fought the union’s request for a mail ballot election, arguing that the election should be on-site under Amazon’s watchful eye. Amazon also manipulated the election process by insisting on adding thousands of workers to the bargaining unit3, which delayed the process and diluted the union’s support. Amazon went so far as to persuade county officials to change the timing on traffic lights outside the facility to give union organisers less time to talk with workers when they were driving to and from work. Meanwhile, union organisers had no similar access to workers and had to reach them outside the warehouse. Amazon forced workers to attend numerous mandatory meetings where the company delivered its anti-union message. Take as just one recent example Amazon’s conduct during the organising campaign in Bessemer, Alabama. ![]() As a result, workers do not have a free and fair choice over whether to form a union – their choice is made in an environment where employers hold too much sway and control. Preventing Employer Interference in the Election Process and Putting Workers and the NLRB in Charge One of the major flaws in current US labour law is that it fails to rein in employer interference in the election process. The PRO Act addresses major structural flaws in the NLRA on both the organising process and the bargaining process, as summarised below. It is far more comprehensive than the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), which failed to pass during the presidency of Barack Obama (although the PRO Act does not contain the majority sign up/card check recognition provision that was a centrepiece of EFCA). The PRO Act is by far the most significant and comprehensive piece of labour law legislation in decades. The US labour movement is unified in supporting and promoting the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act to correct some of the fundamental flaws and weaknesses in the NLRA. ![]() There is a 400% gap2 between the percentage of workers who want a union and the percentage of workers who have one. Yet nearly half of all private sector workers say they would join a union if given the chance. As a result, only one in 12 private sector workers in the United States is represented by a union – the lowest level since the passage of the NLRA. Courageous workers are still able to overcome a system that is stacked against them and organise unions, but many more are stymied by employer anti-union campaigns. Other changes adopted by Congress and the courts gave employers greater leverage in the collective bargaining process. As a result, employers learned to fight and defeat worker organising with a variety of tactics both legal and illegal1, knowing that they would face no real penalty if they were found to have violated the law. But the law was weakened by the passage of the 1947 TaftHartley Act, and employers quickly realised the law had no teeth and could be violated without consequence. The National Labor Relations Act was adopted in 1935 with great promise, establishing as national labour policy the encouragement of organising and collective bargaining by private sector workers. US labour law has failed American workers seeking to organise unions at their workplaces and bargain collectively with their employers. In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content: ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |