Monday, November 24, 2008

More on the Employee Free Choice Act

Here is a letter sent by the US Chamber of Commerce to members of Congress about the Employee Free Choice Act. It is succinct, on-point and accurate and can be used to explain the bill to your friends and enemies.



Be aware that it is highly unlikely this Act will be presented as a stand alone bill. It is very likely the Act will be tied to another bill; i.e. the announced Obama economic stimulus plan, making it difficult to vote for economic recovery without voting for the EFCA. That strategy has to appeal to the Democrats as it gives them a way for early payback to the unions for their support during the election and once again making the Republicans look like the bad guys if they vote against an economic stimulus package.






CHAMBER OF COMMERCEOF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
R. BRUCE JOSTEN
EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT
GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS
1615 H STREET, N.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20062-2000
202/463-5310



November 21, 2008






TO THE MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS:


The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world’s largest business federation representing more than three million businesses and organizations of every size, sector and region, strongly opposes H.R. 800/S. 1041, the “Employee Free Choice Act,” which is expected to be reintroduced and considered in the early part of the 111th Congress. The Chamber urges you to oppose this legislation, and not cosponsor this legislation.


The Chamber believes this bill would undermine long standing principles of workplace democracy and fairness and result in employees having less ability to determine if they wish to be represented by a union. The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) is being promoted by organized labor as labor law reform to level the playing field and allow employees to more easily form unions. This bill does not represent “reform” in any sense of the word. Rather, the legislation will radically restructure 60 years of carefully crafted labor law balances that have served both unions and employers well for many decades.



The bill consists of three provisions, each of which is unacceptable:




  • Elimination of Secret Ballot: This legislation mandates that a union be recognized if a majority of employees in a designated bargaining unit sign authorization cards. This is the provision from which the nickname for the bill, “card check,” comes. If this provision is enacted, the current system where a federally supervised election process with secret ballots determines whether employees will have a union in their workplace would be effectively eliminated. The secret ballot ensures that neither the employer nor the union knows how someone votes. If the bill becomes law, no union would take their chance on an election when getting a few more signatures would guarantee them victory. In contrast to the secret ballot, the card check process would expose employees to a “free for all” environment where any tactic for getting a signature could be used. It has been well established through court cases, precedent under the National Labor Relations Act, and testimony on Capitol Hill of former union organizers that the card check process of obtaining signatures is routinely characterized by harassment, intimidation, and coercion, including employees being threatened in their homes and other locations away from the workplace.


  • Writing contracts through government imposed arbitration: The second provision would result in contracts being written by federal arbitrators instead of the process of collective bargaining and negotiating. Currently, after a union has been recognized, the parties bargain to a first contract where there are protections to make sure both sides negotiate in good faith. Under EFCA, if a first contract is not agreed to within 120 days (which is an extremely short time period for these negotiations) the matter would have to be submitted to binding interest arbitration and a contract developed by a panel with likely no understanding of the business, or the competitive forces it faces, would be imposed on the company for two years. This contract would cover precise details of how that business would operate for the duration of the contract such as the wages, benefits, ability to use employees most productively, and how many employees would be used for specific tasks. This process would virtually always result in a contract that is beyond what the employer is prepared to accept and provides a strong incentive for the union to undermine the collective bargaining process to ensure that the process lasts long enough to end in binding arbitration. Finally, this provision would result in employees losing a second vote since they would have no opportunity to ratify the contract as they currently have in most cases. In a recent poll of registered voters conducted by the Chamber, 75 percent of the respondents preferred a system that encourages good faith negotiations, while only 16 percent preferred a system where government arbitrators write the contract. While the card check provision has received most of the attention in the media, this provision is regarded as equally offensive to employers.


  • Unreasonable and one-sided penalty expansion: Finally, the Employee Free Choice Act imposes dramatic new penalties on employers for violations of the National Labor Relations Act, but not a single new penalty on unions or labor organizers. Under one provision of the new penalty structure, employers would be vulnerable to an injunction reinstating a dismissed employee if that employee, or the union seeking to represent him or her, merely alleges that the dismissal was because of union activity. Such a low threshold makes a mockery of traditional labor law due process. The Chamber believes that the Employee Free Choice Act would have a particularly devastating impact on small employers who, as the primary source for new jobs, would be counted on to reverse the current economic downturn. You may hear that the EFCA should be considered in the context of helping to revive the economy. This bill is an awful idea in good economic times and a catastrophic idea in the difficult economic times now upon us. For more information, analyses, and polling data, please go to
    http://www.uschamber.com/issues/index/labor/cardchecksecrbal.



Sincerely,
R. Bruce Josten

Monday, November 17, 2008

How People Vote

We have just completed what some people say is the most important presidential election in the country's hisory. The campaign process was almost two years long with extensive press coverage. One would think that given the importance and the media coverage the electorate would have been well informed. As usual what one thinks and reality are all to often two different things.

Watch the video on this site and then ask youself:
  1. Are the American people simply unable to cast informed ballots?
  2. Did our media fail us?
  3. How did people decide who to vote for?

http://www.howobamagotelected.com/

Employee Free Choice Act

The Employee Free Choice Act is an important piece of legislation having far reaching impact on our economy coming before Congress. So much information is available about the bill and virtually all of it is biased from the perspective of either the employer or the labor organizations, that it makes something pretty simple appear to be very complex. This post will attempt to serve as a gatekeeper to lead you to information about the bill. I have made a decision but it is up to you to study the information and make your own decision on the merits of the EFCA. I would have to agree that there is little in life that is absolutely black and white and two rationale people can look at the same facts and draw different conclusions.

Where can I read the actual language of the bill?
  1. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.800:
Can you give a synopsis of the bill?
Those generally opposed to the bill, for example The Heritage Organization say:
  1. It requires the National Labor Relations Board to certify a union after a majority of the employees in a recognized group having common interests (a bargaining unit) has signed union authorization cards. This provision will effectively put an end to almost all organizing elections.
  2. It requires companies and newly certified unions to enter binding arbitration if they cannot reach agreement on an initial contract. Neither companies nor employees could appeal the arbitrator's ruling, and the contract would last for two years.
  3. It dramatically increases the penalties for unfair labor practices committed by employers, but not unions, during an organiz­ing drive

Those supporting the bill, for example the AFL - CIO say:

It would restore worker's freedom to choose a union by:

  1. Establshing stronger penalties for violation of employee rights when workers seek to form a union and during first contract negotiations
  2. Providing mediation and arbitration for first contract disputes
  3. Allowing employees to form unions by signing cards authorizing union representation

Where can I learn more about the bill?

Congresspedia http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Employee_Free_Choice_Act

What potential impacts does the bill have on our economy?

  1. Institute for America's Future http://www.ourfuture.org/files/z_historic/EFCA/UnitedStatesofAmerica.pdf
  2. Agenda for Shared Prosperity http://www.sharedprosperity.org/bp181.html
  3. Kilpatrick and Stockton LLP http://efcaupdate.squarespace.com/
Why are people for the bill?
  1. The AFL - CIO http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/
  2. American Rights at Work http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/employee-free-choice-act/home-102/

Why are people against the bill?
  1. The Heritage Foundation http://www.heritage.org/research/Labor/bg2027.cfm
  2. Union Facts.com http://www.unionfacts.com/articles/cardCheck.cfm
  3. National Right to Work http://www.nrtw.org/rtws.htm
Mike's thinking:

We should encourage our elected representives to oppose the EFCA and we should have a bias ( I say a bias because I don't believe in single issue voting) to oppose the election of supporters of the EFCA for the following reasons.
  1. It will represent a major step backwards in labor relations. Labor and management now play on a balanced field that both parties understand. Labor unions are no longer able to organize because they made a strategic decision to move from obtaining improved working conditions through collective action to legislative action. Unions and politicans got in bed with one another for money. Unions had the money collected from members' dues and wanted to exchange it for power. Politicans wanted the money to maintain their positions; therefore, legislation like the Fair Labor Standards Act, Occupational Safety and Health Act, Employment Retirement Income Security Act, Family Medical Leave Act, Equal Employment Act, etc. The result is that labor has obtained 'benefits' that previously could only be gained from collective action. Now employees have all the benefits of union representation except they don't pay union dues. Unions can't organize workers because they have very little to offer. And the resulting cost is that all of us pay union dues in the form of taxes.
  2. One of the most likely outcomes of passage of the EFCA will be increased labor strife and violence as people are intimidated into signing union authorization cards. It is easy to find multiple references to union violence and intimidation during card signing campaigns and representation elections. http://www.unionfacts.com/articles/laborPractices.cfm
  3. In my opinion, there is no way to reconcile taking away the basic American principles of secret ballot elections and majority rule to select our representatives with the provisions of the EFCA.
  4. Introducing the government into the determination of labor contracts through mediation and arbitration is in direct violation of a fair market system.

Saturday, November 15, 2008

All rights reserved.