Do Not Require Workers to Unionize for Consumers to Receive EV Tax Credit

[Curt Renz]

Today I sent the following email to the White House and the three people who represent me in Congress. You may want to express your opinion to those who represent you.

Please strike out the unionization requirement in the bill that includes an income tax credit or rebate to consumers who buy electric vehicles. Workers can always vote whether to unionize. Companies have no say. Neither do their customers. The government should not require workers to unionize for their company’s customers to receive tax benefits. A bill designed to encourage the manufacturing and purchasing of EVs should not also be a bill designed to encourage workers to unionize. Those are entirely separate matters. The best companies are those that treat their employees so well that they choose not to unionize.

 

[MorrisonHiker]

Today I sent the following email to the White House and the three people who represent me in Congress. You may want to express your opinion to those who represent you.

Please strike out the unionization requirement in the bill that includes an income tax credit or rebate to consumers who buy electric vehicles. Workers can always vote whether to unionize. Companies have no say. Neither do their customers. The government should not require workers to unionize for their company’s customers to receive tax benefits. A bill designed to encourage the manufacturing and purchasing of EVs should not also be a bill designed to encourage workers to unionize. Those are entirely separate matters. The best companies are those that treat their employees so well that they choose not to unionize.

Email sent

 

[MarkNW]

Companies and states do have a say in how the union elections are performed and who pays for the union's costs. In the 60's union membership was high and workers took a larger percent of a corporations profits and workers in general had more money to pay for products made by the companies and as a result the US GDP grew wonderfully and everyone benefited. VW which is based in Germany believed that it would be good for it's employees to be unionized, but Tennessee where their plant is located had politicians that hated unions. As a result the plant is not unionized. Many states have passed laws that cause their union members to pay the expenses of negotiations and to take the risks of going on strike and yet all employees end up benefiting from the work of the union as they all end up with the same compensation. The word Union is about the workers being united, but there are many things companies and states can do to separate them.

Tipping the scales a bit in the other direction doesn't seem like a bad thing. I am not naive, unions have bad sides to them too. But over all there has to be some counter force to a single company that can pick off individual workers and make each of them bid against each other for employment. This is a case of unions are a terrrible solution but all the others are worse. If you don't like unions what would you propose instead that equalizes the power equation?

 

[MorrisonHiker]

Companies and states do have a say in how the union elections are performed and who pays for the union's costs. In the 60's union membership was high and workers took a larger percent of a corporations profits and workers in general had more money to pay for products made by the companies and as a result the US GDP grew wonderfully and everyone benefited. VW which is based in Germany believed that it would be good for it's employees to be unionized, but Tennessee where their plant is located had politicians that hated unions. As a result the plant is not unionized. Many states have passed laws that cause their union members to pay the expenses of negotiations and to take the risks of going on strike and yet all employees end up benefiting from the work of the union as they all end up with the same compensation. The word Union is about the workers being united, but there are many things companies and states can do to separate them.

Tipping the scales a bit in the other direction doesn't seem like a bad thing. I am not naive, unions have bad sides to them too. But over all there has to be some counter force to a single company that can pick off individual workers and make each of them bid against each other for employment. This is a case of unions are a terrrible solution but all the others are worse. If you don't like unions what would you propose instead that equalizes the power equation?

This thread isn't about being for unions or against unions. It's to encourage voters to contact their congressmen so that the federal EV tax credit legislation will not require EVs to be built by unionized employees in order to claim the maximum credit.

 

[ThomasD]

What elected official thinks this is a good idea

 

[50amp]

What elected official thinks this is a good idea

Same one that thinks incentives are a good idea.

 

[UncaNed]

Today I sent the following email to the White House and the three people who represent me in Congress. You may want to express your opinion to those who represent you.

Please strike out the unionization requirement in the bill that includes an income tax credit or rebate to consumers who buy electric vehicles. Workers can always vote whether to unionize. Companies have no say. Neither do their customers. The government should not require workers to unionize for their company’s customers to receive tax benefits. A bill designed to encourage the manufacturing and purchasing of EVs should not also be a bill designed to encourage workers to unionize. Those are entirely separate matters. The best companies are those that treat their employees so well that they choose not to unionize.

Done. Thanks again, Curt. I know everybody says it'll never pass, but this might help get it out of the way faster, and why take a chance?

 

[jimm01]

I just sent the opposite sentiment.

Thanks in advance for supporting unionization in the proposed electric vehicle tax credit. Workers can always vote whether to unionize, however the deck is stacked against them. Companies spend millions of dollars spreading false claims and engaging in de facto union busting. All government subsidies to business should require workers to be unionize before any business benefits from receive any direct or indirect financial assistance. A bill designed to encourage the manufacturing and purchasing of EVs should also benefit those who manufacture the products or supply the services. Not just corporations and stock holders. Business stimulus and worker protections must be inextricably linked. History has demonstrated without unions incentives to business have rarely if ever trickled down and resulted in better working conditions, worker safety, pay, and benefits. In fact tit can be argued opposite has been true.

 

[linux-works]

Workers can always vote whether to unionize.

LOL

are you new to the USA?

 

[jimm01]

LOL

are you new to the USA?

It's one for one and one for himself. Oh and would you mind diving on that hand grenade for me?

 

[Curt Renz]

I just sent the opposite sentiment.

Thanks in advance for supporting unionization in the proposed electric vehicle tax credit. Workers can always vote whether to unionize, however the deck is stacked against them. Companies spend millions of dollars spreading false claims and engaging in de facto union busting. All government subsidies to business should require workers to be unionize before any business benefits from receive any direct or indirect financial assistance. A bill designed to encourage the manufacturing and purchasing of EVs should also benefit those who manufacture the products or supply the services. Not just corporations and stock holders. Business stimulus and worker protections must be inextricably linked. History has demonstrated without unions incentives to business have rarely if ever trickled down and resulted in better working conditions, worker safety, pay, and benefits. In fact tit can be argued opposite has been true.

The incentives go to the car buyers, not to the manufacturers. My point was not anti-union. It was that mandatory unionization should be debated and legislated separately from whether car buyers should get an income tax credit.

Is the unionization clause in the consumer income tax credit proposal supposed to incentivize Tesla employees to unionize? Such a connection seems rather farfetched. Is it supposed to incentivize Tesla to stop paying high wages, stop providing employees with stock shares and options, and stop treating employees well in order to get them disgusted enough to vote for a union? This connecting of two entirely separate issues in a bill is pure pork-barrel politics and really not right.

 

[jimm01]

The incentives go to the car buyers, not to the manufacturers. My point was not anti-union. It was that mandatory unionization should be debated and legislated separately from whether car buyers should get an income tax credit.

Is the unionization clause in the consumer income tax credit proposal supposed to incentivize Tesla employees to unionize? Such a connection seems rather farfetched. Is it supposed to incentivize Tesla to stop paying high wages, stop providing employees with stock shares and options, and stop treating employees well in order to get them disgusted enough to vote for a union? This connecting of two entirely separate issues in a bill is pure pork-barrel politics and really not right.

And Tesla gets nothing from the sale.

 

[TravelFree]

Today I sent the following email to the White House and the three people who represent me in Congress. You may want to express your opinion to those who represent you.

Please strike out the unionization requirement in the bill that includes an income tax credit or rebate to consumers who buy electric vehicles. Workers can always vote whether to unionize. Companies have no say. Neither do their customers. The government should not require workers to unionize for their company’s customers to receive tax benefits. A bill designed to encourage the manufacturing and purchasing of EVs should not also be a bill designed to encourage workers to unionize. Those are entirely separate matters. The best companies are those that treat their employees so well that they choose not to unionize.

A problem with the added tax benefit that rewards EV buyers of cars made by Union workers is that it violates the 14th Amendment equal protection clause. But aside from the fact if it is ever passed and signed into law, it will probably be struck down by the US Supreme Court. Of course Union organizers favor this and will deny it. But there has been several test cases setting precedence on Federal laws that violate equal protection.

Anyway, I ran across more information that Tesla may plan on forming its own labor union that is better suited to the goals and mission of the company to promote environmental sustainable energy for transportation. Look up National Organization of Transformative Automakers (NOTA) Workers Union to learn more. While Tesla could stop the Federal Government from creating laws that give unions a competitive advantage over Tesla by forming a Union like NOTA, it won't stop the Supreme Court from ruling against the law as a matter of constitutional compatibility.

 

[jimm01]

A problem with the added tax benefit that rewards EV buyers of cars made by Union workers is that it violates the 14th Amendment equal protection clause. But aside from the fact if it is ever passed and signed into law, it will probably be struck down by the US Supreme Court. Of course Union organizers favor this and will deny it. But there has been several test cases setting precedence on Federal laws that violate equal protection.

Anyway, I ran across more information that Tesla may plan on forming its own labor union that is better suited to the goals and mission of the company to promote environmental sustainable energy for transportation. Look up National Organization of Transformative Automakers (NOTA) Workers Union to learn more. While Tesla could stop the Federal Government from creating laws that give unions a competitive advantage over Tesla by forming a Union like NOTA, it won't stop the Supreme Court from ruling against the law as a matter of constitutional compatibility.

This is by no means a given. But I'll grant you the current bias in SCOTUS. It will be interesting to see how a compelling state interest will be deconstructed as private sector workers, by definition, have no First Amendment protections.

 

[TravelFree]

This is by no means a given.

That's right! Nothing in this is a given which is why I feel anyone serious about buying a Tesla should go ahead and order one, take delivery when you can, and enjoy. If the government gives a tax break for your decision, then great.

As far as bias in the SC, that has been going on for decades. Just that some people do not consider it bias when the SC majority is favoring their ideology.