On a blog called “Florida Kossacks,” Cheryl Schroeder, Executive Director of West Central Florida Federation of Labor explains why the Verizon Wireless was chosen as the location for the Tampa component of the “National Day of Action in Support of Employee Free Choice Act”:

This company epitomizes why the Employee Free Choice Act is so important to working families!

Over at the Democratic Talk Radio Blog last month, Steven Crockett described the Verizon campaign and proclaimed:

Today’s Fight Demonstrates Why We Need the Employee Free Choice Act

Mr. Crockett also asserted that:

The company is intimidating workers and spreading insults; and misinformation while refusing to remain neutral when employees seek collective bargaining.

Mr. Crockett offers no specifics, but fortunately, the Communications Workers of America is maintaining its own blog, entitled “Diary of a Union-Busting Campaign.” There, one would expect to find horror stories of mistreatment of union activists and constant oppression of employee rights. But the diarist makes no mention of such bad behavior. Instead, he merely reports that the company held “captive audience” meetings (i.e., meetings that employees were paid to attend to listen to managers talk about an issue that might impact the company), published a “Union Awareness” website, and started being nice to employees. An example of the information being disseminated by the company is available at THIS LINK.

While the company’s tactics seem a little clumsy, there is nothing to suggest that it is engaging in an unlawful or “unionbusting” campaign. In the months-long effort, the union has filed exactly one Unfair Labor Practice Charge, which alleged that the company’s limitations on solicitation were overly broad. Verizon informed employees that it “supports the right of our employees to make the personal decision on whether or not to be represented by a union.” The company also fired a supervisor because he “wrote a nasty anti-union email pretending to be a VZB worker.”

Despite the fact that union activists are openly soliciting for signatures, demonstrating at stores and shareholder meetings, and wearing pro-union insignia, there are no reports of a single employee being fired or disciplined. In fact, there are no reports of any employee even being scared. The diarist reveals that the “captive audience” meetings aren’t working, and, as has been widely reported, a majority of workers have supposedly signed cards. There is absolutely nothing in the diary to suggest that employees could not exercise free choice in a secret ballot election.

Is this really, as Mr. Crockett and Ms. Schroeder proclaim, “why we need the Employee Free Choice Act”? Didn’t labor and its supporters claim at the House and Senate hearings that it was needed because of widespread abuse of rights? Well, yes. But, as these and other statements reveal, labor’s real motive is to suppress all employer communication – even communication that is not coercive and not unlawful.