If this language is that of the “most extreme” anti-union people, than the New York Charter School Association falls into that category, since these are the regular tropes of its leaders, and just appeared earlier this week on its blog. Maybe the extremists are already inside the gate.

Leo

I’m fairly familiar with the argument around card check recognition and the thuggish argument is essentially the argument you get from big business interest about card check.

Card check works because we live in the real world and unfortunately most employers retaliate against employee’s who are trying to form a union, immediately. It’s why despite the fact that more than 50% of non-managerial workers want a union fewer than 12% of the workforce is unionized. I can’t tell you how many horror stories I’ve heard from workers and organizers who are trying to start a union.

You write:

‘But this should be the end of the blogosphere controversy about how teacher union “thugs” use “card check” recognition to force “compulsory unionism” on “unsuspecting, naive teachers.” Or it would be if evidence mattered.’

A few thoughts:
1. This seems to be a “Proof by Anecdote” argument. I see a fair bit of that in your writing.

2. I think you are grouping by implication the most extreme anti-union people with those that are simply anti-”card check”. I, for example, am not anti-union, but I do think that secret ballot union votes are, on balance, a better and fairer process than “card check”.

3. I am not sure what your example proves since the secret ballot approach ultimately lead to the desired outcome. I am not familiar with the particulars of this situation, so I am guessing you can explain.

Ken