Have It Your Way? Burger King To Get Involved In War Against Employee Free Choice Act
Uh oh — this could be a major setback for labor and others pushing for the Employee Free Choice Act.
The fast food giant Burger King is getting involved in the battle against the measure, the company’s corporate offices confirm — something that will certainly dismay labor leaders.
A couple weeks ago the unions thought they’d won a major battle by getting Burger King — which spent hundreds of thousands lobbying against Employee Free Choice last year — to back down from working against it this time around. But a few days ago, a Pittsburgh paper reported that Burger King hadn’t backed down at all.
So I checked in with Burger King’s corporate headquarters in Miami. They sent over a statement:
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.
However, BKC has an obligation to educate and inform its employees, franchisees and key stakeholders on any proposed legislation that could affect the business. Key points of the proposed “Employee Free Choice Act” legislation (also known as “card check”) could have significant implications on the BURGER KING® system‘s 1,000 plus franchisee-owned small businesses.
Labor leaders will read Burger King’s vow to “educate and inform” key “stakeholders” as code for a promise to spend resources on campaigns against the measure. If this comes to pass, this will be a big deal.
As it happens, Burger King isn’t the only food service giant targeting Employee Free Choice: Starbucks has also announced that they’re opposing the measure.
Meanwhile, in other Employee Free Choice news, it looks as if Citigroup, a major recipient of public bailout cash, has downgraded Walmart’s stock, all because of Employee Free Choice.
All of which is to say that proponents of the measure are up against some very powerful interests right now.
The homepage of this blog is here. Its RSS feed is here. And its Twitter feed is here.
All of which is to say that proponents of the measure are up against some very powerful interests right now.
Greg, no offense, but when is labor NOT up against very powerful interests? They are up against management – everywhere.
tena — no argument from me on that.
BK would rather kill everyone with high cholesterol for less.
And don’t forget, one of the major investors in Burger King is Goldman Sachs, a bank which we are bailing out (if only as counter-party to AIG).
http://www.seiu.org/2009/02/king-size-combo-new-report-reveals-broad-toll-on-taxpayers-by-bailed-out-bank-goldman-sachs-and-its.php
Reminds me of the Bank of America opposition to EFCA…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/27/bank-of-america-hosted-an_n_161248.html
“There is another war being fought in America today, a secret war that has devastated the economic world and wrought even more destruction to the American social world. This is the undeclared but ongoing war between American business entities and any kind of organized labor (Unions). It is a war in which business has taken defacto control of the White House, by successfully plotting the rigged presidential elections in 2000.
The roots of this war can be found in the militancy of the American labor movement back in the late 1960s and early 1970s when a series of wildcat strikes did great damage to the corporate system and threatened to unleash more strikes from far stronger unions in the future. Business regrouped and managed to elect presidents, like Ronald Reagan, a former labor leader himself who, for money, influence and perks formed a strong anti-union movement in the higher reaches of the American government.
Aside from a flood of governmental orders and court assisted anti labor rulings, the most potent weapon in the business arsenal was the concept of out-sourcing American jobs to much safer foreign countries, countries that did not have labor unions in any form. Factories were emptied of American workers and the work was parceled out to foreign countries like China, India and Indonesia. But by shipping an enormous number of jobs to safer, and cheaper, foreign labor markets, business created an enormous vacuum in American society. Youths, straight from high school no longer could get well-paying jobs in American industry because most of these jobs, with attendant union membership, were now outside the United States. None of this outsourcing was an accident and although the Republicans occasionally were here to bemoan the loss of jobs, they never made any effort to prevent the flow of jobs away from this country. Bush and his people were squarely in the pockets of both militant Israeli and wealthy American business power groups and one of them shouted “squat”, George Bush ran into the corner of the Oval Office and squatted like a toad. Another part of this warfare was to tacitly allow an enormous number of Mexicans to pour, unhindered, into this country where they could be used as cheap, unreported and untaxed labor. Occasional raids were permitted but the millions of cheap and, most important, non-union, workers ensured that the day of the American labor union as an economic and political force was over, at least during the terms of Republican presidents.
Bush and his far-right thugs may be gone but the anti-labor policies and practices remain. Unless and until they are stopped and, more important, reversed, the economic picture in America will be bleak and wintry indeed. Businesses who have emptied their workplaces and stuffed their pockets should be heavily taxed along with all of those American businesses who have moved to foreign countries to reduce their taxes. They seem interested only in enriching themselves at the expense of the American people and if this policy of greed and secret control is not stopped abruptly, there can only be more economic and social destruction!”
Source: Bradley Moscrip
http://www.b.moscrip@yahoo.com
Starbucks is visciously anti-union. The IWW has been organizing Starbucks in NYC. The corporate response has been to fire union organizers. Eventually, the company was forced to rehire the workers, but so what.
Oops, shouldn’t have had that latte.
Burger King, Starbucks- eff you. Eat and drink locally owned.
I have ordered from Buger King a lot. They usually mess up my order and I say nothing. This time I repeated my order the girl even took it right. I got home and it was wrong. I called up and said I would even bring it back and was told no. A month later no cupon. I called back and the manager on duty was very cold and did not care. I called the DM and no response. It is quite obivious they don’t care if you have it your way. It is not the point of getting a free meal but enough is enough and they flat out don’t care about customer service. DO NOT ear at Burger King in Schofield, WI they do not care the same mistakes over and over and do NOT FOLLOW THROUGH.
I hate to admit it but I have regularly patronized BK. No longer.
Starbucks has always done without me, they can continue to do so.
George McGovern opposes card check, too, as anti-democratic. A reasonable argument can be made against the measure; it’s not just anti-union rhetoric.
Seems to me the UAW, Teamsters, LIUNA, SEIU, etc. could be fairly categorized as “powerful interests” themselves – ones that have a historical tie-in w/the Tony Sopranos of the world.
What exactly is democratic though about denying a worker’s right to vote on unionization in privacy, vs. having to declare their choice publicly and in front of union organizers at their home, parking lot, outside their children’s schools…..?
Perhaps it’s not about right-and-wrong though. Perhaps supporters just want to bring the miracle of efficiency, job security, and success that unionization has brought to industries like automobile manufacturing, airlines, and public education. The results certainly speak for themselves.
The vote does not have to be public, employess can vote over the internet privately. On our most recent drive we just post the website for them to go to, also hand out cards to anyone who asks.
I can guarantee you, the only fear and intimidation is from the employer. We need laws to protect pro-union employees. The evidence, is seeing the fear of my co-workers, that were afraid to even mention the union word, for fear of retribution from our employers.
Long Request,walk supply egg require stand certain solicitor when decision indeed border centre sexual ourselves understand wife village sky survey pool theatre window fire introduce roof true cut employment aim male convention guide farm front represent thin smile experience somewhat release political in rate surround ordinary protect teach vehicle dry have fairly original clear entire provision mind positive crisis protect basic interesting before stop marriage find best country sir pay family black post stock brother us something wide realise victory type chapter war request rain study