Employee Free Choice Act: Still Not Free, Still No Choice

Democrats recently announced they will drop card check from their ironically titled “Employee Free Choice Act”. Even after this compromise, the EFCA is still bad news for workers everywhere. Unfortunately, Big Labor and it’s congressional allies have repackaged their same brand of nostrum and are determined to force it upon Americans.

Still alive and well is a proposal to cut the time for an organizing vote from an average 38 days to only five or ten, if 30% of workers request a union. 

Worst of all, the Employee Free Choice Act includes binding arbitration. That is to say, if the union and employer do not reach an agreement in a set time, a third party government arbitrator will determine salaries and benefits. Compulsory interest arbitration has slowly destroyed sensible fiscal management and efficiency.

The Mackinac Center for Public Policy found that in Michigan, average time for a third party arbitrator case lasted 15 months, defeating the whole purpose of outside arbitration. The failures of binding arbitration have been recognized in Michigan and Massachusetts where, consequently, citizens have voted to repeal these measures.

The Employee Free Choice Act is still just as wretched as it was when it included Card Check. It offers no freedom or choice to either the employee or the employers. Rather, this legislation essentially forces employers to turn over their corporations to greedy union organizers and an unceasingly growing omnipotent federal government.

McGovern on Card Check

Former Senator and Presidential nominee George McGovern - and though I hate the cheap labels used by the media, they would probably call him an "ultra-liberal" - writes in today's Wall Street Journal about the misnomer of the the Employee "Free Choice" Act (aka Card Check):

[T]he bill has an additional feature that isn't often mentioned but that is just as troublesome -- compulsory arbitration.


This feature would give the government the power to step into labor disputes where employers and labor leaders cannot reach an agreement and compel both sides to accept a contract. Compulsory arbitration is bound to trigger the law of unintended consequences.

Currently, labor law maintains a careful balance between the rights of businesses, unions and individual employees. While bargaining power differs depending on individual circumstances, the rights of the parties are well balanced. When a union and a business enter negotiations, current law requires that both sides bargain "in good faith."

In a contract negotiation, each party typically perceives the other as too demanding. But no one loses their right to contract willingly or suffers being forced to agree to anything. Employees can strike if they feel that they have been dealt with unfairly, but it is a costly option. Employers are free to reject labor demands they find to be too difficult to accept, but running a business without experienced employees is itself difficult. Both sides have an incentive to press their demands, but they also have compelling reasons not to press their demands too far. EFCA would disrupt that balance by enabling government-appointed lawyers to decide what they believe is fair or reasonable.

What will you do when union organizers show up at your home?

The latest video from the Commonwealth Foundation:

Union Bosses Dupe "Unlicensed" Blogger

In his blog today, John Micek makes a couple of jokes about "Joe the Plumber" - probably to avoid being called "Rat Rat Rat" by union bosses (who promise not to intimidate workers if card check passes), as Joe the Plumber was, a at rally against card check in Harrisburg.

His jokes only illustrate the myths that union bosses continue to perpetuate:

[Joe the Plumber] who, you'd think, would be a big fan of unions, being a plumber and all.

Why would I think that? Only 30% of pipelayers, plumbers, pipefitters, and steamlayers are union members - more than 2 out of 3 choose not to join or form a union. And opposing card-check has nothing to do with being anti-union, but opposing legislation that would take away workers' rights. In fact 74% of union households oppose card check.

Oh ... wait ... he's not really a plumber.

Micek is fooled into thinking that the definition of a plumber is someone who got a plumber's license from government, rather than noting that occupational licensing in merely another tool unions and special interest groups use to intimidate their competitors.

For instance, as a case in point, does anyone really believe Micek's reporting would improve if he obtained a Reporter's License from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania? Or better yet, his Blogger's License?

Union Intimidation in Action

Unions claim they won't use intimidation as one of their tactics if the Employee Free Choice Act, a.k.a. "Card Check" is passed, eliminating the secret ballot in union elections. But their behavior at a rally held by those opposed to card check, as described by the Post-Gazette, illustrate exactly what workers should fear when these organizers show up at their homes.

As Mr. Wurzelbacher ["Joe the Plumber"] characterized the labor measure as a threat to democracy, many members of the crowd of more than 100 cheered enthusiastically. But their approbation competed with calls of "liar," "pay your taxes," and a few more colorful words from the sizable union contingent that had migrated from a demonstration outside to infiltrate the audience in the Green Tree Radisson.

The saga of Joe the Plumber is one of constant intimidation by unions and their political allies. Officials with the state of Ohio illegally released private information about Wurzelbacher after he asked Obama a tough question, revealing he owed back taxes - putting him in a category with about two-thirds of Obama's cabinet appointees.

The unions then went after the fact the Joe "the Plumber" didn't have a plumber's license from the local government. But professional licensing is just another tool used by unions, business cartels, and special interest groups to undermine their competition. Innocuous professions like plumber, eBay sellers, drivers for the Amish, hair braiders, tour guides, and the like are subject to harassment under the guise of occupational licensing - frequently having their right to earn a living in their chosen profession revoked.

The long history of union intimidation is just one reason why the secret ballot must be preserved.

Sen. Specter's Comments on "Card Check"

Senator Arlen Specter made news yesterday by saying he would not vote for "card check" because of both the elimination of the secret ballot and the bind arbitration provisions. Here is Specter's statement, along with his recommendations for changes to the National Labor Relations Act.

A couple things trouble me in Specter's remarks - the first being that "middle class needs to be strengthened through more power to unions in their negotiations with business" and that unions "have suffered greatly from outsourcing of jobs to foreign countries and losses in pension and health benefits."   The notion that the middle class is suffering is a fallacy  and if the middle class is "disappearing", it is because they are becoming richer (also see ReasonTV's Drew Carey on this topic).  And jobs haven't been lost to foreign countries so much as other states - specifically states with greater worker freedom and right-to-work laws. 

Second, Specter states that "I would be willing to reconsider Employees’ Free Choice legislation when the economy returns to normalcy."  This is troubling, given that he accepts that card check would cost jobs and hurt the economy - I don't understand why such bad economic policy is acceptable in non-recessions.

Brad Vasoli also has an article on the economics of card check in the Bulletin - I will quote him quoting me:

Mr. Benefield also said policymakers should be mindful of the downward pressures unionization can exert on employment. But he does not believe unionization is uniformly bad. He said labor organizations should be allowed to represent any private-sector staff that wishes to be represented, but only if no one is forced into membership and workers can choose a union without coercion.

More info on card check

AFL-CIO Pledges Votes for Specter in Quid Pro Quo

Our good friend Bill George, head of the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO, has promised to help out Sen. Arlen Specter, if and only if he votes for "card check", the Washington Times reports (HT to Americans for Prosperity):

Pennsylvania labor leaders promised Sen. Arlen Specter that they will switch union members from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party to help him win a tough 2010 primary election, The Washington Times has learned.

Pennsylvania AFL-CIO President William M. George said he pledged Mr. Specter "all kinds of help from the union" in a series of meetings to woo the Republican senator's support for the bill, which would ease rules favoring secret-ballot elections to unionize workplaces.

"We are pushing to give him help in the primary, including changing Democrats to Republicans for the primary," Mr. George told The Times. "It's hard to do because of other races in the state ... but we'll do it for 'card check.' "

Maybe I'm being naïve, but isn't offering to use the powers of your organization to help an elected official win re-election in exchange for his vote on a specific piece of legislation illegal? Any lawyers care to weigh in here?

The Attack on the Secret Ballot

Tom Gies has an article in The American on the Employee Free Choice Act, also known as card check, which would do away with the secret ballot in union elections and replace it essentially with a card you would sign. 

The Heritage Foundation has more on how unions will manipulate workers and has posted an actual "card" if you want to see what it looks like,

Here is another video of former union organizers describing their tactics to get workers to sign the card:



In Pennsylvania, there is a new group called Citizens to Protect PA Jobs (HT: Tony Phyrillas).   The Manufacturer's and Business Assocation has a card check tool kit the PA Chamber also as a one-pager on card check.

Warren Buffett on Card Check: Short and Sweet

Warren Buffett bluntly expressed his views on card check during CNBC's Squawk Box this morning, saying that "the secret ballot is pretty important in this country."

Buffett adds his voice to the concerns of many groups (National Right to Work, The Union Label Blog, Union Facts) and even George McGovern.

Card Check Would Cost Millions in Jobs

A new study finds that "card check" legislation, if enacted, would increase unemployment by 1.5 million jobs for each 3% increase in union membership (HT Tony Phyrillas).  If union membership were to increasy by 5% to 10%, as some have suggested, between 2.3 million and 5.4 million jobs would be lost.  OpenMarket.org has more.

Obviously, with our unemployment rate already rising, now is not the time to enact a job-killing bill like this, which is why Obama told union organizers that they're going to pass it.  Wait ... what?

Is the secret ballot in danger?

As "the first hundred days" starts today, what is in the cards for the Obama administration?

A couple of weeks ago, Kimberly Strassel of the Wall Street Journal reported that support the "Employee Free Choice Act" - commonly referred to as "cardcheck", as it would take away the secret ballot in union elections and replace it with a signing a card - is waning, as many lawmakers who voted for it before would pass, now that it is likely to pass this time.

On the other hand, the SEIU plans to pour millions of union dues into pushing for cardcheck, and unions are launching a major media campaign this month.


Meanwhiles, Governors from 10 states have joined together to oppose card check legislation.

More on Card Check:

• The Manufacturer's and Business Association has a number of resources on cardcheck. 
• Richard Epstein: The Employee Free Choice Act is Unconstitutional
• Heritage Foundation Resources on Card Check 
  
• Editorials Against EFCA 
• Center for Union Facts
• Employee Freedom Action Center
  
• MyPrivateBallot.com
• SaveTheElection.com

PA Congressional Delegation Ratings on Worker Freedom

The Alliance for Worker Freedom has their new scorecard on the 2nd session of the 110th Congress.  Key votes include a number of expansion of Davis-Bacon prevailing wage laws (which drive up the cost of construction, contracted services, and the like).  Below are the scores of the Pennsylvania delegation.

Casey 0%
Specter 25%

Pitts 100%
Peterson, J. 78%
Shuster 67%
Dent 44%
Platts 44%
Murphy, T. 33%
English 22%
Gerlach 22%
Altmire 0%
Brady, R. 0%
Carney 0%
Doyle 0%
Fattah 0%
Holden 0%
Kanjorski 0%
Murphy, P. 0%
Murtha 0%
Schwartz 0%
Sestak 0%

In related news, Sen. Specter (who is considered to be a pivotal vote) now says he is undecided (HT GrassrootsPA) on the "card check legislation", which would effectively eliminate the secret ballot in union certification votes.

Ending secret ballot elections: Change you can believe in?

Rick Berman of the Center for Union Facts writes in the DC Examiner that the first priority of the Obama Administration may well be outlawing secret ballots in union elections. Obama's incoming chief of staff is more coy about it. The so called Employer Free Choice Act would require unions to be certified only through "card check" - essentially when 50% of employees at a workplace sign a petition. This, of course, would make it public (to both union bosses and your employer) that you signed the petition.

Despite the fact that only 8% of voters support this legislation, Democrats are pushing it. Why? Unions, who spent $450 Million in workers' dues during the election cycle (primarily to elect Democrats), feel that getting rid of the secret ballot is the only way to increase their rolls.

More Resources:

• Center for Union Facts
• Employee Freedom Action Center
  
• MyPrivateBallot.com
• SaveTheElection.com
• National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation
• Alliance for Worker Freedom

Voters still like limited government, lower taxes

A poll from the Club For Growth surveyed voters in 12 competitive Congressional districts; eleven of the 12 switched hands from Republican to Democrat following Tuesday's elections. The results might surprise some:

• Voters think the federal government does too much (54% to 39% saying government should do more)
• Voters favored cutting spending to bringing home federal projects 66% to 23%
• Voters support tax policy aimed at better economic conditions to spreading the wealth 73% to 21%
• Over 60% of voters want to extend the 2003 tax cuts on capital gains and on across the board on personal income, and favor permanent repeal of the estate tax.
• 62% of voters believe drilling in ANWR would reduce gas prices, and 75% support offshore drilling
• Only 8% of voters support card check legislation.
• 51% support personal accounts for Social Security and a plurality (47% to 41%) think free trade is good.

So why did Democrats pick up seats?

• Voters thought the bailout was bad (49% to 32% saying good)
• Voters opposed federal government guarantees of mortgages 71% to 20% (part of McCain's plan)
• A plurality think Democrats are better for "promoting economic growth" - 36% to 32% (24% said "no difference")
• 43% said Republicans were "The party that supports taxpayer bailouts for big corporations" vs. 15% for Democrats (26% said both).
• Republicans were identified as "The party that gave us the Bridge to Nowhere" - 48% to 13%
• And a whopping 80% agreed with "The Republicans used to be the party of economic growth, fiscal discipline, and limited government, but in recent years, too many Republicans in Washington have become just like the big spenders that they used to oppose." 

Pat Toomey has a column in the Wall Street Journal on the results of this poll. 

The Card-Check Party

The Wall Street Journal's John Fund notes that the Democrats almost committed a major blunder on one of their key labor union campaign issues -- ending the use of secret ballots. Fund writes:

Politico.com reported that the Obama campaign was seriously considering letting delegates vote by secret ballot, the better to avoid intimidation and fear of reprisal from local party bosses. But the plan -- which was pushed on the Obama camp by supporters of Hillary Clinton -- was suddenly dropped when it was realized that a key plank of the Democratic Party platform backs a so-called "card check" provision being added to the nation's labor laws. Card check would effectively strip workers of the protection of secret ballots in union elections. Business groups and former Democratic presidential nominee George McGovern oppose the measure on the grounds that it exposes workers to harassment and intimidation.

That was precisely the concern of Democratic delegates who wanted to cast a secret ballot vote on the convention floor. The Obama campaign thought seriously about accommodating them until it realized how such a naked contradiction to the party's stance on union balloting might look to voters and the media.

Just Say No to Card Checks

Check out this Wall Street Journal article by former Senator George McGovern on the dangers of the Employee Free Choice Act.

The Act would impose a card check system on employees contemplating unionism instead of the current practice of secret ballot elections. Secret ballot elections allow workers to cast their decisions free from peer pressure and intimidation, while open card checks are not confidential.

50% or more of a company's employees must be in support of unionism in order for organizing to take place. The so-called Employee Free Choice Act would ease the way for heavy-handed tactics as union officials try to reach mandated quotas.

McGovern shares his concern about the Act's implications:

I worry that there has been too little discussion about EFCA's true ramifications, and I think much of the congressional support is based on a desire to give our friends among union leaders what they want. But part of being a good steward of democracy means telling our friends "no" when they press for a course that in the long run may weaken labor and disrupt a tried and trusted method for conducting honest elections.

Unionism is already forced on many Pennsylvania workers--let's hope employees will be able to retain what little security they do have.

Employee Free Choice Act Would Disenfranchise 105 Million Workers

Web Memo on proposed card-check legislation from the Heritage Foundation