The Right Not to Unionize
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
As the lead attorney for the employees who petitioned for a secret-ballot election in the Dana Corp. and Metaldyne cases before the National Labor Relations Board, I must object to Harold Meyerson's criticism of the board's decision [op-ed, Nov. 21].
These cases were brought by workers to protect their right to freely choose or reject unionization. In both cases, employees were pressured to sign cards that were counted as "votes" for unionization. In both cases, the unions and the employers signed private deals apparently intended to result in unionization regardless of employee sentiment.
The employees I represented simply wanted a secret-ballot election to determine whether a majority supported the union, and the NLRB ruled that employees have that right. What is so horrible about that?
GLENN TAUBMAN
Staff Attorney
National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation
Springfield
