McDonald's girding for union fight

[Omaha Steve]

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=32115

By: David Sterrett Dec. 06, 2008

McDonald's Corp. is mobilizing its U.S. restaurant owners to fight a measure in Congress supported by President-elect Barack Obama that would make it easier for workers to unionize.

In a Nov. 25 memo, McDonald's USA President Don Thompson urged 2,400 franchisees to "contact your U.S. senators and representatives to oppose" the Employee Free Choice Act.

The EFCA, or "card-check" bill, would enable unions to organize a workplace by obtaining the signatures of a majority of workers on authorization cards. Current law requires secret ballots. In addition, the legislation would establish a bargaining process that could lead to binding arbitration for labor contracts.


McDonald's USA President Don Thompson

Mr. Thompson warns franchisees of the "gravity of the issue," saying the legislation, "if enacted, will impact the McDonald's system." Binding arbitration, he adds, would result in worker contracts "being written by government-appointed arbitrators who are not familiar with our business and don't have long-term accountability for the decisions they make."

With more than 600,000 U.S. restaurant workers, many earning less than $10 an hour, the chain makes an attractive target for union organizers. Unionized employees could demand higher pay and stricter work rules in McDonald's kitchens.

"This bill is a huge threat to fast food and has the ability to impact the long-term health of the industry," says Rick Berman, a lobbyist in Washington, D.C., for the restaurant industry.

FULL story at link.

[patrice]

1. Doesn't EFCA result in contracts "...being written by government-appointed arbitrators..." only if

a majority of employees want a Union BUT Management interferes and the employees appeal for arbitration?

[Omaha Steve]

2. Here is the correct answer in PDF

http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/upload/first_arbitration.pdf

IF it goes to binding arbitration, the ruling on pay, benefits, etc... is finale with no appeal.

[patrice]

4. I was trying to clarify the conditions under which that happens, not whether their decision is final

or not.

Wouldn't it only go to the government arbitrators if someone, management or employees, interferes with the process. If either side screws with the decision making process, the other side, whichever side that is, appeals to the NLRB for some arbitraters to figure the problem out and whatever the arbitraters say is final, no appeal.

My point is,

IF

anyone wishes to keep the government out of it, all they have to do is deal with the other side in good faith, this will keep the decision between management and employees, without government involvement.

What Mr. CEO of McDonald's fails to mention is that the burden is actually on management and employees to work it out themselves without the government. Government arbitraters don't just step in, for no reason, and make decisions that can't be appealed. There has to be a cause that triggers their involvement.

[patrice]

5. P.S. The point of my point is that government involvement is about the PROCESS not the ISSUES,

,or substance, of what is at stake between management and employees.

So if McDonald's doesn't want the government mucking about in its business all it has to do is deal with Labor farily, respect the Process.

[Omaha Steve]

12. Yes

If they come to a mutual agreement, mediation (the US Government) is not involved. It is covered in the link. It is PDF, so I can't copy and paste it here.

[TahitiNut]

16. A PDF can be copy-and-paste'd ... using the 'Text' tool in the reader. Like this ...

Why We Need First-Contract Arbitration

According to a new study by John Paul Ferguson at MIT:
• 44 percent of newly certified unions fail to get a first contract. So even when workers surmount all the obstacles and succeed in forming a union, employers often deny them the benefits of collective bargaining.

Those benefits are substantial. According to a path-breaking study by Cornell's Kate Bronfenbrenner, first contracts typically contain a wide array of economic and noneconomic gains for workers, including:
• Grievance and arbitration provisions,
• Job-bidding rules,
• Seniority clauses,
• Anti-discrimination language,
• Anti-sexual harassment language,
• Health and safety protections, and much, much more.

Why are so many newly formed unions unable to get first contracts?
The current company-dominated system does little to punish employers that refuse to bargain in good faith. Even if a union proves an employer is bargaining in bad faith, the current remedies usually involve the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) requiring the employer to resume bargaining and post a notice in the workplace stating it will not bargain in bad faith again.

Further, newly formed unions lose their presumption of majority status after one year without reaching a contract. This gives employers the incentive to delay the bargaining process for a year and force the demoralized workers to vote again, often resulting in the union's decertification.

First-contract arbitration is a key provision of the Employee Free Choice Act.
Here is how it works:
• If a new union and an employer are bargaining for their first contract and are unable to reach an agreement within 90 days, either party may request mediation by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS).
• After 30 days of mediation, if there is still no agreement, the dispute is referred to binding arbitration.

How will the Employee Free Choice Act help?
By giving workers the right to request mediation and arbitration, the Employee Free Choice Act guarantees that every worker who forms a union will get a contract. Likewise, by granting workers the recourse of mediation and arbitration, the Employee Free Choice Act eliminates the incentive for employers to bargain in bad faith. Knowing that delaying the process indefinitely is no longer an option, employers are much more likely to bargain in good faith. The Employee Free Choice Act will dramatically reduce the delay, frustration and animosity associated with the current company-dominated system.

(All formatting, including line-wrap, is edited after paste.)

[Omaha Steve]

23. Thank you

I knew somebody would help. :-)

[NNN0LHI]

3. When Walmart goes union I will start shopping there

I don't think people realize how fortunate we are to to have a pro-worker administration.

Some do. But it seems like most don't.

Don

[Orsino]

21. There's a lot to hate Wal-Mart for besides their rabid anti-unionism...

...but if they suddenly found themselves staffed by union workers, I might do some shopping there, too.

[tom_paine]

6. Fuck MickDs and their special liver-destroying ingredients.

I'm no doctor, but I am a biologist who has taken some anatomy and physiology classes, so I know a little bit about the topic.

It is INSANE that the things that occurred to Morgan Spurlock in his film "Supersize Me" caused his liver to sicken so damned rapidly it started leaking uric acid (one of the most toxic waste products our bodies produce) into his blood.

One other part of the movie, just glossed over, really, and people probably missed it, was the doctor who has started doing long-term studies on kids who eat lots of McDs was now taking biopsies of the kids' livers to start a baseline for compraison over the years.

At 11 and 12, these livers are already showing signs of cirrohses. At 11 or 12!

Here's an experiment I propose: Someone like Spurlock should try what he did but FIRST do a "30-day local pizza shop diet" to see if the local pizza shop has the same effect on his liver, THEN recover and THEN do what Spurlock did, 30 days McDs diet, and see if there is any difference.

My scientific intuition says the local pizza shop WILL NOT cause rapid liver sickening, even though the food is just as fatty as McDs.

But "scientific intuition" is worthless in that all i can do is suggest what experiments to perform and it is THEY which tell the tale.

Maybe I am wrong, and the local pizza shop's food would cause a liver to sicken to the point where it was leaking uric acid in 21 days, as McDs did to Spurlock.

THAT is why the experiment NEEDS to be performed, so we can have a look at the hard data which may help us answer the question.

And IF the local pizza shop's food does not have a deleterious liver effect (or a much smaller one), then the NEXT QUESTION is What the hell are they doing tio their food in the processing that s causing this unique liver-detroying effect which has undoubtedly helped sicken millions?

[patrice]

7. Don Thompson is objecting to there being a Referee for this fight. nt

[GrantDem]

8. I think Corporate America is overreacting just a little.

They are acting as though the passage of the much needed EFCA will be the death knell of the entire business community.

[SmileyRose]

9. Another company that thinks their own workers are their enemy.

sad..............

Your workers SHOULD be your best asset...............

[patrice]

10. Truly Sad, because in doing so, guess what, your Workers do become your enemy.

Self-fulfilling prophecy is utterly reliable in interpersonal(nel) relationships.

[xchrom]

11. Look for the Union Label!!! nt

[Omaha Steve]

13. kick

[Greyhound]

14. "...long-term health of the industry"... Oh the irony!

:rofl:
:kick:

[TahitiNut]

18. He must equate EFCA with HFCS ... reason for concern.

:evilgrin:

[Odin2005]

15. ORGANIZE!!! n/t

[dorktv]

17. It is $0.10 a burger to give them living wages Mr. Thompson.

I think that your customers can handle that.

[Orsino]

20. Or how much out of executive bonuses? n/t

[dorktv]

22. No idea.

[malaise]

19. Go workers

Wipe that grin off his smug face.