Georgia's Isakson Questions BHO's Sec Labor on Union's Secret Ballot

If the Unions have their way with taking away worker's rights to vote via secret ballot, we may as well throw in the towel. We will ultimately be a unionized nation of workers, unable to compete on any reasonable level with other countries. The Unions will be another arm of government without any of the meager restrictions that currently hamper our politicians.

I see the new regime chipping away at the foundation of our country from so many angles it's virtually impossible decide where to focus. It's death by inches. We focus on trying to fight the un-"Fairness Doctrine" and they inch forward on the "Employee Free Choice Act" (how much time went into choosing the names of that misleading moniker?). We focus on the monumental problems with the economy while they inch forward with unqualified or far-far-left cabinet appointments. While we focus on national issues our local governments stick out their hands for money, happily agreeing to comply with all the Federal strings attached.

I'm not one to get discouraged, but I can already tell that the next few years are going to test every positive bone in my body.

Our Georgia elected representatives seem to be, for the most part, conservative. I don't agree with everything they've signed onto or supported. In fact, if we had good viable, conservative choices in a few cases, I'd cast my vote in that direction. However, overall the Republican's seem to have the right views.

U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson (R-GA) sent this release out Friday. Although many of you aren't in Georgia, I think you'll find it interesting reading.

Isakson Pushes Labor Nominee to Oppose Eliminating Workers’ Rights to Secret Ballot in Choosing Whether to Unionize

Isakson Notes Nominee’s Previous Support of Secret Ballot for Workers in Negotiating Flex Time

1/9/09 WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., today questioned why President-elect Obama’s nominee for Secretary of Labor supports legislation to strip workers of their right to a secret ballot when deciding whether to unionize, but previously insisted on a secret ballot for workers during negotiations with management on flex time.

The nominee, U.S. Rep. Hilda Solis of California, voted for legislation to strip workers of the secret ballot when deciding whether to unionize in 2007, but pushed legislation in the California Legislature in the late 1990s in which she insisted that workers have the secret ballot when negotiating with management on flex time and overtime pay.

“You insisted that there be a vote by all employees and that it be by secret ballot. Why would we want to change the law of the United States now with regard to how unions are organized and eliminate the secret ballot?” Isakson said to Solis during her hearing this morning in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.

Solis responded to Isakson this morning that she was not prepared to make a statement about her position on the secret ballot at this time.

Isakson strongly opposes the so-called Employee Free Choice Act, also known as Card Check, which would eliminate the rights of workers to participate in a secret-ballot election in order to certify the creation of a union. The legislation would force employees to make a public declaration of their preference by allowing union organizers to bypass elections if a majority of employees sign cards authorizing a union.

The legislation passed the U.S. House in 2007 and is expected to be brought forth by Democratic leaders for a vote in the Senate this year.

Isakson believes the current system, which allows employees to use a secret ballot in choosing whether they want a union to become their exclusive representative in the workplace, has worked well because it neither advocates nor discourages unionization.

Isakson blamed declining union membership as the motive behind the legislation, which did not receive committee consideration. Union membership among private sector employees is at its lowest level in decades.

Isakson also used the nomination hearing for Solis to stress the importance of writing regulations that both protect workers and allow businesses to operate efficiently.

“In my four years on this committee as the Republican leader on the Employment and Workplace Safety Subcommittee, I have worked with Senators Murray, Kennedy, Enzi and others to try and strike this delicate balance,” Isakson said. “We have a strong record of working together on critical issues to American workers such as mine safety reform, banning asbestos, and pension protection.”

I wouldn't hire them...

I've done a lot of hiring (and a little bit of firing) over the years working in corporate America.

One of the rules I had when I interviewed someone for a prospective job was that if they badmouthed their current or previous employer or boss in any way, I wouldn't hire them. In fact, I found some way to shorten the interview and get them out of my office.

If someone will badmouth the employer they're leaving then what's to stop them from badmouthing me, my staff, or my company in the future? It says something about their outlook on life and work ethic.

It also showed a high level of stupidity and a complete lack of common sense.

Now we have these dirtbags who think they're saving their own necks by trashing Sarah Palin. Sorry dudes, it's you who should be trashed. I'd like to find the names of all the aides who worked with Sarah Palin and put them out on the Internet work sites and political sites with a big X through their names.

"Do NOT hire these idiots"

I've run numerous campaigns, too.

Campaigns are tough and there's a LOT of stress. Negative personalities should steer clear of that pressure-cooker environment. People who are there to promote themselves are in the wrong business. It's all about promoting those at the top.

When they take pot shots at Sarah, they're also taking those same shots at John McCain. He "hired" her.

It has crossed my mind that there really aren't any aides out there saying these things. It's more of those reporter-fantasy tales we heard during the election. They heard it from someone who heard it from someone who really knows someone who said it. Thus it's true.

Just by virtue of the fact that these dimbulbs are only speaking anonymously says a lot about their personality, backbone, and character. They are quivering, snidely schmucks.