Cravat Coal In Confessions Of A Union Buster Analysis

For this week, I was assigned to read the chapter, Cravat Coal in Confessions of a Union Buster, were written by Marty Jay Levitt and Terry Conrow and the article was published in 1993. In the article, Levitt and Conrow talked about a lot of things but mostly Wagner Act and what the employers can do or not to the workers. The question for this assignment—“Based on details in the article, “Cravat Coal”, how does the Wagner Act favor the employer?” The authors talked about delaying time showed the workers that union is not a quick fix. “Our petition to expand the Cravat voting unit was filed two weeks into the campaign, and the case took at least three weeks to resolve. That kind of delay steals momentum from a union-organizing drive, which is greatly dependent on the emotional energy of its leaders and the sense of urgency among workers” (Levitt & Conrow, pg. 13). The authors said that delaying shows to the workers that union organizing is not easy and quick to fix because there are a lot of restrictions and problems. There are fees that the members of a union has to pay, the authors wrote, “Subsequent

The authors wrote, “I told the foremen the legal limits were clear: to get our message out, they could make statements of fact, or of opinion, as long as the statements did not constitute a threat. They were not to worry about what to say. We, the experts, would take control and supply them with everything they needed for the campaign. We would supply the facts, in the form of twice weekly letters signed by the general manager to be distribute by foremen to the workers. We would supply the opinion, through group meetings at which the letters would be discussed. We would supply the methodology, reaching the foremen at group meetings and at individual sessions how to approach their crewmen and track each worker’s union sentiment. ” (Levitt & Conrow, pg.