• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Courtesy: U.S. House Education and Labor Committee Republicans Rep. John Kline (R-MN), Senior Republican Member A Year’s Worth of Reasons Not to Enact EFCA A compilation of daily alerts from the first session of the 111th Congress January 6, 2009 – December 18, 2009 Introduction The Employee Free Choice Act. Seldom has there been more incongruously named legislation. It extols “free choice” but takes away the fundamental elements of private voting and meaningful negotiating that are vital to workplace democracy. The legislation tilts the playing field in favor of a powerful political interest, and in the process, denies employee free choice far more than it creates it. For the past year, the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee Republicans have tracked EFCA and the broader issues it raises on the pages of the nation’s newspapers and in sources that range from academic journals to public polling to current events. That effort was translated to become Secret Ballot Watch, a daily email publication designed to expose the dangers of EFCA to workers and our economy. The name Secret Ballot Watch derives from the most infamous provision in EFCA, known as “card check.” Under the card check system envisioned by EFCA’s special interest supporters, workers could be forced to join a union through a public sign-up process that exposes their vote for all to see. Gone is the privacy of the ballot box; instead, workers could face public pressure, intimidation, or even coercion to sign or not sign “the card.” Although card check is the best known feature of EFCA, Secret Ballot Watch has focused on other elements of the act as well. For instance, its binding arbitration provisions empower federal bureaucrats to commandeer contract negotiations if an employer and newly formed union cannot reach agreement within a brief bargaining window. Binding arbitration encourages bad-faith negotiation, giving incentive for either side to make unrealistic demands because an arbitrator may ultimately step in to make the final ruling and split the difference. Worse than that, it disenfranchises workers yet again. Although workers today are often able to vote on whether to accept a contract, that would not be the case under EFCA. After being forced to join a union without a secret ballot vote, this type of arbitration could impose a contract (including wages, hours, benefits, and work rules) for two years without any approval or acceptance by the workers. From the first moments of the first session of the 111th Congress on January 6, 2009, Secret Ballot Watch has monitored and shined a light on EFCA and its harmful consequences. Now that the first session has come to a close, this compilation represents A Year’s Worth of Reasons Not to Enact EFCA. In the last year, this publication has examined public opinion, international law, and the hypocrisy of EFCA supporters who defend workers’ right to a secret ballot in Mexico, but not here at home. It has highlighted support for secret ballots in states from coast to coast, and drawn lessons from Canada and its experiences with an EFCA-like law that increased unemployment and reduced productivity. Captured herein are the acknowledgments of EFCA’s supporters that the legislation is designed as payback for political and financial support. Yet these daily alerts demonstrated opposition to EFCA and support for the secret ballot among staunch liberals and iconic labor supporters, proving just how far outside the mainstream the legislation falls. And to illustrate just how desperate EFCA supporters have become, this publication exposed a pro-EFCA lobbying strategy that included advocacy by Hollywood actors from a fictional Washington, D.C. and a multi-million dollar advertising campaign to persuade the public to embrace a law that takes away their rights. Clever names notwithstanding, Secret Ballot Watch: A Year’s Worth of Reasons Not to Enact EFCA debunks the myth that this legislation provides employees with free choice and exposes the bill as little more than an anti-worker, anti-job, special interest giveaway. January 6, 2009 Countdown to Card Check: When Will Democrats Try to Take Away the Secret Ballot? Moments ago, the 111th Congress was officially gaveled into session and workers’ right to a secret ballot was officially put in jeopardy. Congressional Democrats have made clear that they intend to move forward on the controversial “card check” scheme, which would replace federally- monitored secret ballot unionizing elections with a public sign-up process that opens workers to intimidation and coercion. The timeline for the unpopular plan – cynically referred to as the Employee Free Choice Act by its supporters – remains unclear, but one thing is certain: Powerful union leaders consider card check to be political payback for their support in the last election, and they won’t wait long to call in the favors they believe they are due. Gerald W. McEntee, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), recently told editors and reporters at The Washington Times that “unions paid their dues by supporting Democrats and President-elect Barack Obama in this year's election. He said they expect that effort to be rewarded with action. “‘The payback would be Employee Free Choice Act – that would be a vehicle to strengthen and build the American labor movement and the middle class,’ he said.” But the truth about card check’s impact on workers is far less rosy than the picture union bosses paint. Consider the following testimony delivered to the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee during the 110th Congress: “I began my career with UNITE with a strong belief in worker’s rights and democracy in the workplace,” said Jen Jason, a former organizer for UNITE-HERE, a union that represents nearly a million workers and retirees in the textile, lodging, foodservice, and manufacturing industries. “During the course of my employment with the union, I began to understand the reality behind the rhetoric. I took in the ways that organizers were manipulating workers just to get a majority on ‘the cards’ and the various strategies that they employed. I began to appreciate that promises made by organizers at a worker’s house had little to do with how the union actually functions as a ‘service’ organization.” Tactics detailed by Jason included: • A “blitz,” in which union organizers go directly to the homes of workers; the workers’ personal information and home addresses used during the blitz are obtained from license plates and other sources that were used to create a master list. According to Jason, “The workers usually have no idea that there is a union campaign underway. Organizers are taught to play upon this element of surprise to get ‘into the door.’” • Rarely showing workers an actual union contract, which often does not reflect what a worker would want to see. Jason noted, “We were trained to avoid topics such as dues increases, strike histories, etc. and to constantly move the worker back to what the organizer identified as his or her ‘issues’ during the first part of the housecall.” • Manipulating unit size, in which organizers would change the size of the group of workers they were going to organize after the drive was finished. According to Jason, “During the blitz, workers in every department would be ‘housecalled,’ but if need be, certain groups of workers would be removed from the final unit, regardless of their level of union support. In doing so, the union reduced the number of cards needed to reach a majority.” Card check remains unpopular with the American public, with nearly 80 percent of the American people opposing the bill when it was brought to a vote in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2007. Perhaps that’s why Democrats are plotting a spin campaign to mislead workers and families and hide the truth about this undemocratic measure. It’s hardly a promising start to the 111th Congress. January 7, 2009 In Case You Missed It … Card Check “a fundamental violation of the secret ballot principle” An illuminating editorial appearing in today’s edition of Investor’s Business Daily pulls back the curtain on the misnamed Employee Free Choice Act, exposing the legislation as a payback to organized labor that would disenfranchise millions of American workers. Despite its noble-sounding name, the legislation won't expand freedom. The bill could be more accurately called the card check act, for it has nothing to do with free choice. Quite the contrary, it seeks to reverse unions' waning influence by eliminating the secret ballots that workers historically used to organize in a federally supervised election. Instead, under card check, a union is certified when a majority of workers signs the cards that are now used to merely gauge employee interest in voting on union participation. These cards aren't secret, so it's a fundamental violation of the secret ballot principle. It's not hard to imagine the intimidation workers would be subject to when they're offered cards to sign. And it's not as if nonunion workers are clamoring to join a union but are afraid of management reprisals if they do. By more than a 3-to-1 margin, polls show, workers say don't want to be part of organized labor. The full editorial can be viewed online here. Card check is notoriously unpopular with the American public, and for good reason. It eliminates secret ballot unionizing elections, exposes workers to intimidation and coercion, and threatens jobs through a binding arbitration system that would exclude both workers and management from key employment decisions. It’s no wonder supporters of this undemocratic power grab are trying to mask the bill’s true intentions.

Load more

  224

Copy Link