marta
Nathan Newman wrote:
> Bradley speaking to the Iowa AFL-CIO:
>
> "Used to be that thirty percent of the workers in the private sector were
> represented by a union. Now that's down to 11%...And I think that you have to
> begin to say, "Why is that the case? Why is that happening?"...
>
> It is because it is more difficult to organize. It is because the law is tilted
> in the other direction. It is because the Congress of the United States has not,
> since 1978 taken a hard look at labor law reform in this country. That is why
> these numbers have occurred. And that means if you are going to get more people
> represented by a union - and in so doing give them a chance to do better by
> their family - you've got to try to change these laws so that more people can
> succeed in their organizing efforts.
>
> For example, the law now says that it is against the law to fire an organizer.
> But we all know that the law doesn't work. It doesn't work because there are no
> teeth in the law. If you're organizing, and someone has a whiff that you're
> organizing, you're fired like that. Because an employer only has to pay - after
> a lengthy process, he only has to pay back wages - that's it. I think we need to
> put teeth in that law, and say that if somebody is fired for organizing, and it
> goes through that process and you prove it, then that employer has to pay three
> times back wages, plus punitive damages.
>
> I think you've got to shorten the time between when cards are collected, and the
> election actually takes place.
>
> I think you need a ban on striker replacement in this country.
>
> I think you need to make the companies that violate the labor laws ineligible
> for government contracts in this country."