H.R. 800 (Employee Free Choice Act of 2007 ) Measure Title: A bill to amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish an efficient system to enable employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to provide for mandatory injunctions for unfair labor practices during organizing efforts, and for other purposes. Just came across this: An exerpt from an article by Thomas J. Donohue, President and CEO, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
July 22, 2008
That's because the legislation would eliminate the expense and worker protection of secret ballot elections. It would give union organizers free rein to pressure workers into signing authorization cards. Once enough workers are persuaded to sign, the union would automatically be certified, and it would be illegal for workers to have a secret ballot election. Then the bill would implement a compressed schedule for employers to bargain with their new union. If an agreement isn't reached in time, a government-mandated arbitrator would dictate the terms and conditions of employment and hand the employer a contract—and even the workers wouldn't get a chance to vote on it.
But there's more. Also high on these unions' agenda is allowing the establishment of mini-unions. For example, organizers could go in and just sign up two or three people--not even a majority--and then you've got a union! Big labor also wants to mandate employer-paid leave and health care regardless of ability to pay, criminalize OSHA violations, nationalize health care, and increase taxes and the size of government.
Ah, there are many reasons that one might be skeptical of such legislation. Here's just a few off the top of my head!- Consider the auto industry, which is notably struggling, in part, due to the fact that it can't compete with it's foreign counterparts.
- Employee Free Choice? Huh? No secret ballots! Compressed schedules!
- Mini unions – what the #$@%? Let the inmates run the asylum!
This bill would seemingly wreak havoc on small business and I for one do not want to see this thing come to fruition.
2 comments:
Not sure where to start with this blog - you obviously need to do more research.
First, "it would be illegal for workers to have a secret ballot election" - this is just not true. EFCA will create an alternate method of organizing (through a card-check procedure), but secret ballots would not be illegal - workers trying to organize would have a choice.
Second, "If an agreement isn't reached in time, a government-mandated arbitrator would dictate the terms and conditions of employment and hand the employer a contract". Yes, this is called binding arbitration. You see, under the current law, even when workers form a union, it doesn't mean they have a voice. Companies have learned that they can refuse to bargain in good faith, thereby removing any power from a union of workers. Yes, it's illegal, but very difficult to prove and almost impossible to enforce. So arbitration means someone from the NLRB (and believe me, the NLRB is certainly not a bunch of lefties!) takes the two sides and forces them to compromise. It's not a perfect solution, but if a company refuses to bargain, what alternative is there?
Third, there is the redefinition of smaller units (mini-unions, as you call them). I don't get it - don't all you anti-union hacks criticize unions for "forcing" workers to join a union if a majority support it? Why then wouldn't smaller bargaining units make you happier - now if a certain department, location, etc wants to organize, the rest only join in if they want. I think any opposition to this aspect of the bill shows that these bill critics aren't actually interested in strengthening workers' voices - why else would you oppose both sides of the "mini-union" debate?
And finally, you're saying that the card-check is going to remove democratic choice. I can see how it might look that way without looking deeper into the matter. First, over 40 million American workers have said they would join a union if given the opportunity. So what is stopping them? It's an extremely anti-worker labor law structure. Did you know, for example, that in over a quarter of organizing drives, workers are illegally fired for their union activity? The punishments for such illegal behavior is a joke - that's exactly what EFCA is supposed to correct.
Wes, thanks for the insights. It's obvious that you put some time in. Again, this commentary was meant to spark a conversation not a clash. I'm always open to the ideas and viewpoints of others. I'm sure my opinion came across a bit harsh. Just a small business owner watching her back!
Post a Comment