 |
 |
|||||
|
E-Activist
Sago Mine Owner Tries to Block Union Role in Investigation How far will employers go to keep unions from speaking out on behalf of working families? We learned just how far on Jan. 25 when the U.S. Department of Labor had to request a restraining order and injunction against the International Coal Group (ICG)for interfering with the investigation of the Sago Mine disaster that killed 12 workers. Family members and co-workers of the miners who lost their lives designated the Mine Workers to represent them in the probe, as was their right under the federal Mine Safety and Health Act (MSHA). But ICG, instead of cooperating, sent security guards to block UMWA safety experts from entering the mine. What's more, ICG demanded to know the identity of the workers who requested UMWA representation, a clear attempt to intimidate their workforce. Though a federal judge later granted the Labor Department's request and ordered the mine's owner to let the UMWA join the investigation team, the company has appealed the decision. MSHA does not allow employers to bar unions from participating in safety investigations or to learn which employees request union representation. The Labor Department was forced to act because ICG, by refusing the UMWA access to the mine, was impeding an investigation that was already behind schedule in getting into the mine. "At nearly every turn, ICG has flouted federal law and stepped up intimidation and harassment of the employees at Sago in its desperate attempts to stop the UMWA's participation in the investigation," said UMWA President Cecil Roberts. Danger: NLRB Ready to Rule on Important Cases The members of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) have long observed an informal policy against issuing decisions that reverse important precedent or set out major new policy without a three-person majority. In recent months, the board has had just two Republicans and one Democrat who has steadfastly refused to erode workers' rights. So major decisions have been on hold. Now that is all about to change, and there will be disastrous consequences for workers in this country and their rights to organize and bargain. With the recess appointments of controversial Republican Peter Kirsanow on Jan. 4 and Democrat Dennis Walsh two weeks later, the NLRB now has its full allotment of five members - three Republicans and two Democrats. There are a host of important issues pending before the board, including: When an employer may withdraw union recognition. What constitutes a discriminatory no-solicitation/no-distribution rule. How to determine whether an employee is considered a "supervisor" and therefore not covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Whether to continue barring decertification petitions for a reasonable time after a majority of employees chooses a union and their employer voluntarily recognizes it. Whether airport screeners have the right to form unions under the NLRA. We will report the major decisions as the board makes them. Based on Bush's NLRB record to date, I expect virtually every decision will go against workers' interests and the Wagner Act's original purpose of promoting free access to collective bargaining. Investment Group Drops Comcast over Worker Rights Record Calvert, one of America's most important socially responsible investment management firms which handles more than $10 billion in assets for 400,000 investors, has dropped Comcast from all of its portfolios, citing the cable giant's "workplace practices and labor relations." The decision by Calvert's Social Index Committee was based on a recommendation by the firm's Social Research Department, which looks at the 1,000 largest U.S. companies and conducts a "social audit" on their practices in the areas of "environment, workplace issues, product safety, community relations, military weapons contracting, international operations and human rights, and respecting the rights of indigenous peoples." Comcast was the focus of Dec. 10, International Human Rights Day, activities in various locations, including Pittsburgh, where several hundred Communications Workers of America members have been fighting decertification campaigns for years as they struggle for a first contract. Canadian Unions Fighting for the Freedom to Form Unions Four of Canada's largest unions recently signed an agreement to promote and protect collective bargaining rights for Canadian workers. The agreement was signed by leaders of the National Union of Public General Employees (NUPGE), the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW Canada), the Canadian Teachers' Federation (CTF) and the Canadian Professional Police Association (CPPA). Just as we have witnessed in the United States, the freedom of Canadian workers to form unions and bargain collectively has been under attack in recent decades. "Over the past 20 years we've seen a serious erosion of our fundamental rights to bargain collectively and withdraw services if necessary, and it's our governments that are mostly to blame," said NUPGE President James Clancy. "Rather than protecting our labor rights, federal and provincial governments have stood by silently and sometimes even provided the legal means to ignore and abuse these fundamental human rights." Since 1982, Canadian governments have passed more than 170 regulations and laws restricting or suspending collective bargaining rights for Canadian workers. "Labor rights are human rights and governments can't cherry pick which human rights they want to protect and promote in a democracy," said David Griffin, executive officer of the CPPA. For more information, go to the NUPGE website at http://www.nupge.ca/ . Wal-Mart Tries to Exclude Union Members from Getting Benefits Reversing a lower federal court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit ruled that Wal-Mart workers are allowed to proceed with their lawsuit charging the company with violating the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) by excluding union members from receiving the company's pension and health benefits. In 2001, Wal-Mart changed its 401(k) and health plans to include a clause that stated, "Contractually excluded and certain other union represented associates are not eligible for coverage." The workers claim this move was an effort to keep workers from joining a union because they believed they would lose their benefits. The NLRB issued a complaint against Wal-Mart, and in 2003 an administrative law judge ordered Wal-Mart to rescind the "union exclusion" provision. Wal-Mart filed exceptions that are still pending with the NLRB. The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, where Wal-Mart is headquartered, dismissed the workers' lawsuit, finding their ERISA claims were pre-empted by the NLRA. However, on Jan. 19, the appeals court overturned that ruling and allowed the workers' case to proceed. Friends with Low Wages Check out a great new video about how Wal-Mart treats its workers, "Friends with Low Wages." The Flash animation, available on the American Rights at Work website, parodies Garth Brooks' popular song, "Friends in Low Places." Brooks recently signed an exclusive distribution deal with Wal-Mart and was featured in the retail giant's holiday ad campaigns. Check out the video now at http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/ and take action against Wal-Mart's abuse of its workers' rights. Wanted Democrat, Republican and Independent Political Activists Too Hold Our Elected Officials Accountable! Are the candidates you supported performing as promised? Are they listening to your letters and phone calls? Are they truly working for your benefit? Please join us in an effort to hold them accountable for their actions/inactions. To have your voice heard, regardless of party affiliation, call Executive Vice President Judy Perez, (562) 259-9400 Vice President Rich Herrero, (707) 836-9303 Director Steve Kunysz, (562) 259-9418 The Bush Administration has proposed new personnel rules for 750,000 civilian Defense Department workers that would:
Known as the National Security Personnel System (NSPS), these rules become a model for attacks on collective bargaining throughout the federal government—and by states and private-sector employers. The rights of all of us are threatened. Click here to make your voice heard now for worker's rights. The Bush administration is accepting comments from the public on the proposed rules for just a few short weeks. Click here to send a message opposing these rules. It's important to use the language provided because it is in the format and uses the technical citations necessary for official comments. The Bush Administration and the Republican led Congress is trying to make it as difficult as possible for our voices to be heard. This is democracy? While these rules do not directly affect all of us (right now) we can’t let our guard down on this one. This is another part of the systematic attempt by Republican leaders to take away workers rights and turn everything into a Wal-Mart department. Click here to contact the Defense Department and speak out against these rules.
Privatizing Social Security will mean huge benefit cuts and less
security for working families--but for Charles Schwab, privatizing
Social Security may mean millions of new customers to bail out what
Business Week Online called the "ailing" company.
Schwab's corporate philosophy description says its goal is to offer
individual investors "useful, ethical services at a fair price." The
most ethical service Schwab could provide for working families is to
withdraw support for privatizing Social Security. - Disclose what it has communicated to public officials in private meetings about Social Security. - And withdraw all support for privatizing Social Security Take action now. Please tell Charles Schwab: Don't support Social Security privatization. http://www.unionvoice.org/ct/97qte5Y1DPBs/ Social Security is America's best-run, most successful family insurance program. Millions of retirees, survivors and people with disabilities rely on Social Security. President Bush's plan to move Social Security funds into private accounts may be good for Schwab's business--but it would hurt working families terribly, forcing devastating cuts in benefits and replacing retirement security with retirement risk. Charles Schwab's support of Social Security privatization is in serious conflict with the interest of its customers.
Please contact Schwab CEO Charles "Chuck" Schwab. Urge him to drop
his company's support for Social Security privatization. Thanks for all that you do.
|
|
|||||
|
© 2006 CWA LOCAL 9400 |
||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
||
