Put down that grande non-fat caramel macchiato or whatever Starbucks concoction you're drinking. Turns out the coffee giant has a nasty history of being anti-barista, anti-union, and thus anti-Employee Free Choice Act as well.
The National Labor Relations Board has repeatedly found Starbucks guilty of illegally terminating, harassing, intimidating, and discriminating against employees attempting to unionize. Late last year, a judge ruled Starbucks had committed over a dozen violations of the National Labor Relations Act at a few New York stores. Starbucks has settled five such labor disputes in the last few years in New York, Minnesota, and Michigan, spending millions on legal fees to avoid exposing their anti-worker ways.
To make matters worse, Starbucks has led the charge on a so-called Employee Free Choice Act "compromise," joining Costco and Whole Foods to form the Committee for Level Playing Field. This Orwellian-sounding group has come up with a "third way" on Employee Free Choice, which would require 70 percent of workers to sign union authorization cards instead of the far more manageable 50 percent initially proposed by this legislation.
Al Franken could be the missing piece of the puzzle for passage of the labor movement's No. 1 legislative priority this Congress, a senior union official said Wednesday.
Once seated, the Democratic Minnesota Senate candidate would be the 60th vote for cloture in the Senate on the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), said Bill Samuel, director of government affairs for the AFL-CIO.
"That is likely to be the case. We are not giving up on other senators," Samuel said. "In the very worst case, we are going to have to have Al Franken."
This is certainly plausible, and wold make more sense why Republicans are fighting tooth and nail on a court case that is seemingly lost cause of them. The Employee Free Choice Act scored 51 votes for cloture in 2007. Throw in Democratic Senator Tim Johnson, who was sick at the time, and that makes 52. Add seven more freshman Democrats in Congress who took over Republican held seats--Mark Begich, Kay Hagan, Jeff Merkley, Mark Udall, Tom Udall, and Mark Warner--and EFCA support rises to 59. And then, only Al Franken, plus holding all 2007 voters in line, pushes EFCA over the top and into law.
Labor reform, media reform, immigration reform, election reform--these are some of the policy areas that can shift the major institutions of our country to the left. As far as building long-term progressive governance is concerned, passing these positive feedback loops into law is second in importance only to saving the economy through a re-organization of public spending.
(Welcome back, me! Thanks to Chris for allowing me a chance to post about the Employee Free Choice Act.)
"A firestorm bordering on Armageddon." "Nuclear war." "Ready to riot in the street." "They should be shot." "Pro-slavery."
For more than a year, corporate groups have been spreading lies and misinformation about the Employee Free Choice Act, which would let workers rather then employers decide how they want to organize. They've gone from arguing against this legislation on the merits to, in some cases, all-out doomsday predictions "of the demise of civilization" and equating it to "Radical Islam."
Big and bold. That's Mike Lux's recipe for sweeping transformative change. That's the way for progressives to achieve a Big Change Moment, as Lux calls it in his new book, "The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America Came to Be." Lux likens progressive ideals to American ideals, and calls for progressives to pressure cautious Democrats hesitant to spend political capital.
I'm not talking about President Obama specifically. As Lux wrote here yesterday, Obama has taken tremendous strides to get past the hurdles of centrist cabinet picks and stay on the progressive track. You could hear calls for a Big Change Moment in Obama's congressional address last week, and you can see audacious ambition in his economic recovery bill and budget. While Lux is right when he says we shouldn't hesitate to disagree with the President on everything from the banking crisis to the war in Afghanistan--particularly when Obama respects plurality of opinion--this ought to go double (or I guess increase exponentially depending on your math skills) for every Democrat in Washington right now.
All week long, Brave New Films, SEIU and manyprogressivebloggers have been holding Burger King's feet to the deep fryer. Together we exposed Burger King's horrendous working conditions; launched a contest asking people to Have It Their Way with Goldman Sachs (Burger King's top shareholder) for squandering $6.5 billion of the bailout on bonuses while average BK workers earn less than the federal poverty line; and staged peaceful demonstrations at Burger Kings across the country protesting the fast-food chain's low wages, lack of healthcare, and lobbying against unionization legislation. So what was Burger King's response? They served up this flamebroiled pile of garbage yesterday:
"Burger King Corp. (BKC) believes unions serve a purpose in some workplaces and a number of its guests, vendors and franchisees have positive union membership experiences. BKC is not anti-union. BKC and its franchisees serve a diverse consumer base and, therefore, aim to remain neutral on political issues."
Neutral on political issues, eh? If that's the case, why did Burger King spend $319,648 between 2006 and 2008 lobbying against pro-labor laws like the Employee Free Choice Act? Why did Goldman Sachs spend $15,849,000 in 2008 alone lobbying against the Employee Free Choice? And why, as SEIU's Michael Whitney noted, has Burger King fought this legislation through their involvement with the National Retail Federation, which stands firmly behind an anti-union group called the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace?
Have the Republicans lost all sense of reality? In the midst of a crushing recession, our country is hemorrhaging jobs. According to Think Progress, the Labor Department reported we lost 598,000 jobs in January, and 1.8 million in the last three months. The livelihoods of millions of Americans and our entire economy are at stake, and yet GOP obstructionists are stonewalling President Obama's economic stimulus plan and the nomination of Hilda Solis for Labor Secretary.
The Senate Labor committee postponed Solis' nomination yesterday because of a recent USA Today report about her husband's outstanding California tax liens. (NOTE: it was her husband's auto repair business, not anything to do with Solis herself.) Though the tax liens have since been repaid, Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) and his Republican cohorts are still delaying the confirmation vote, claiming they need to investigate Solis' involvement with American Rights at Work (ARAW), a pro-labor non-profit. But this really boils down to the GOP's inherent fears over the Employee Free Choice Act, a bill Solis co-sponsored in the House that would enable workers to unionize more easily and negotiate for equitable wages and benefits and safer working conditions.
As David Dayen wrote over at Calitics, "The American Rights at Work thing is a complete red herring. She was a representative figure for those who supported Employee Free Choice in Congress. She is not a lobbyist. She supported a bill. And so denying her free-speech rights seems ridiculous to the extreme."
Solis might understand the needs of workers better than anyone in Congress. There's no question she could help ensure President Obama's plan to create 3.6 million jobs by next year actually happens. We must fight like hell to get her approved. Join this Facebook page and help confirm Hilda Solis now. Then, sign American Rights at Work's petition to support the Employee Free Choice, where you snag their Employee Free Choice widget for your own personal blog.
