DOWNLOADS: (175)

PLAYS: (2854)

Embed

If there's one thing you can say about Fox "news," it's that they're really not subtle. That was definitely the case here where Stuart Varney, filling in for Neil Cavuto this Monday, brought in the spokesman for Walmart to attack the Black Friday strikers where the segment was literally sponsored by Walmart.

Fox's Fawning Pro-Walmart Segment "Brought To You By Walmart" :

Fox News ran a segment sponsored by Walmart that defended that company from workers who are planning a Black Friday strike.

In an interview with a Walmart spokesperson about the planned strike, Fox News' Stuart Varney did not mention the concerns of the company's workers, instead praising the company for "taking on" unions, asking if they planned to fire striking workers, and plugging the company's charitable efforts following Hurricane Sandy. Following the segment, Fox News ran a banner ad explaining that "this program is brought to you by Walmart," followed by an advertisement for the company's Black Friday promotion. [...]

Walmart has responded to the protests by filing a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board alleging that the strikes are illegally being led by the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union.

At no point in the November 19 segment on Fox's Your World did Varney mention the purpose of the strikes, instead asking only the following questions of guest David Tovar, the company's vice president of communications:

• "David, you've taken on the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, I believe. You've filed this complaint against them. Is that enough to stop any walkout the day after Thanksgiving? Our viewers, maybe some Walmart shoppers, they want to know, are they gonna hit these roadblocks?"
• "Now you've filed a complaint against the United Food and Commercial Workers Union. You said 'hey, stop messing around with our business.' Can you sue them? Can you take them for any money if your complaint is valid?"
• "Yeah, David, I got it. I know you're out there doing your best for Walmart. But look, can you stop these protests? Will this complaint, this labor complaint, will it stop the protests?"
• "David, I want to know how sharp-edged you're going to be. You've got a fight on your hands. I want to know how rough Walmart's gonna be. For example, if some of your workers walk out, walk off the job on Black Friday, will you fire them?"
• "Would you agree with me that you're in for four tough years, because this administration is no friend to Walmart?"
• "One last one: the storm, Hurricane Sandy in the Northeast area, New York in particular. You're not allowed to do business in New York City and yet, I believe, you were handing out a lot of stuff to the victims of Sandy. Is that correct?"

Varney has an extensive record of attacks on unions, asking in January 2011 if American workers would resort to "violence in the streets" in response to potential service cuts in California.

On Saturday, MSNBC's Up with Chris Hayes ran extensive reports on the planned strike. According to Hayes, Walmart had informed the program that the company had no one available to appear on-air.

You can read more about the Black Friday strikes here -- Support Walmart Black Friday Strikers.

DOWNLOADS: (123)

PLAYS: (146)

Embed

After the Senate rejected another proposal by Republicans to make it harder for employees to form a union in their workplace, Sen. John Thune made a visit to Fox's Neil Cavuto this Tuesday to complain about those "big union bosses" getting their payback from Democrats, because heaven forbid we're not going to allow companies lots of time to intimidate, harass and potentially fire their employees who would like to unionize.

From the AFL-CIO -- Republican Attack on Fair Union Election Rule Fails in Senate:

Congressional Republicans today failed in their latest attempt to roll back workers’ rights. The U.S. Senate defeated (45-54) a measure (S.J. Res. 36) to kill a new National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) rule that makes modest changes in the procedures for workers who want to vote on whether to form a union. It also would have banned the NLRB from ever issuing any similar fair election rule. [...]

Christine Owens, executive director of the National Employment Law Project (NELP), said of the Republican proposal:

It is disappointing that in the face of growing income inequality and stagnant wages for all but the highest earners, lawmakers would fail to stand by workers who seek only to exercise their legal rights in an atmosphere free of intimidation and retaliation.

The rule is due to take effect April 30 and it will help alleviate the delays, inefficiencies, abuse of process and unnecessary litigation that plague the current system. Under current rules, workers can be forced to wait months or even years before they are allowed to vote on joining a union and then begin bargaining for a fair contract. The new NLRB rule eliminates many of those roadblocks by reducing current delays and eliminating frivolous litigation.

Contrary to the vitriolic attacks by Republican lawmakers, the new rule does not encourage or discourage unionization and it applies to elections to form a union and elections to decertify a union.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said the Republican attack on the NLRB ”is just the latest in this relentless series of nationally coordinated assaults on workers and collective bargaining rights.” [...]

In November, House Republicans approved a bill that gives employers new tools to combat and delay elections by workers who try to form unions. It was a direct response to the new NLRB election rule. The Senate didn’t take up the measure.

Congressional Republicans have made nearly 50 separate assaults on the NLRB since last year by holding hearings, issuing subpoenas and proposing bills to gut the agency’s funding and eliminate its ability to hold employers accountable for violating workers’ rights, according to American Rights at Work (ARAW). Click here for a detailed look.

Thune's interview with Cavuto below the fold.

Continue reading »