Card-check “Employee Free Choice Act” EFCA H.R. 800 S.1042

“All quiet on the western front.” No, I am not referring to the 1930 movie about World War I. At least it has been quiet on one major piece of pending national legislation known as “card check” or more formally the “Employee Free Choice Act,” EFCA, H.R. 800 and S.1041.
While CEO’s of the “big 3” meet with Congress seeking billions of taxpayer dollars to stay afloat, we hear that organized labor unions may be prepared to make some concessions.  Folks. That’s who got us in the box as it relates to the high cost of every domestically produced automobile and truck of U.S. corporations.
While I do not oppose the opportunity for workers to join organized labor it should be by a “federally supervised private ballot” election.


The following article is from Diane Stafford of the Kansas City Star newspaper. While I am posting it here the story link can be found at the end of the post.

Businesses gird for the Employee Free Choice Act debate

By DIANE STAFFORDThe Kansas City Star

Say “card check” — and watch employers go weak in the knees, human resource managers sweat, and employment law attorneys gear up for business.

“Card check” is shorthand for the Employee Free Choice Act, a piece of legislation expected to be a top priority when Congress reconvenes in January.

The AFL-CIO says the act will improve workers’ rights to collectively bargain for better pay and working conditions.

The Heritage Foundation and other management-oriented organizations say the act will take away worker privacy and freedom.

At issue is how a union might be established in a workplace.

Currently, if union organizers get 30 percent of employees in a work group to sign union-interest cards, the National Labor Relations Board orders an election. A secret ballot election is held about six weeks later, giving both union and employer time to campaign pro or con.

The Employee Free Choice Act would change the organizing rules. If a majority of employees in a work group sign a union card (that’s the “card check”), the union would become the official bargaining unit — no more six-week waiting period giving employers time to make a case against the union; no more subsequent election.

“It may be all done before you have any idea it’s going on,” warned one of several employment law attorneys I’ve heard speak in the last few weeks at seminars for human resource managers and business owners.

There’s already a lot on the plates of human resource managers. Changes in the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act are vying for their attention.

But nothing seems to lather up employment law attorneys — whose clients are employers — as much as the possibility that the Employee Free Choice Act becomes law.

A bill passed last session in the House but died in a Senate filibuster. With changes in the Senate in the November election, the appetite may be stronger for passage. And, whereas President George W. Bush promised a veto, President-elect Barack Obama supported the act during his campaign. As proposed, the act also would mandate arbitration for collective bargaining agreements, setting 120 days as the limit to resolve issues. Currently, unions and employers can bargain till the cows come home.

It could be that the act is too divisive for Obama to embrace early in his term. It could be that congressional representatives, who voted for it before because of the “cover” from Bush’s guaranteed veto, will change their votes. It could be that the votes just won’t be there in the Senate.

But, just in case, Shelly Freeman, principal in the human resources consulting firm of HROI, had some sound advice at a recent Lathrop & Gage legal seminar:

Employees who feel valued and rewarded don’t necessarily feel the need for a union.

The time is now for employers to be visible and communicate with their workers.

The time is now for employers to have ready answers when employees ask them to compare what a union can offer workers in terms of pay, benefits, job security, safety, other work issues, and voice.

Perhaps (and this is me talking) it’s also time to consider profit sharing or, at the least, more open-book management practices that make employees feel and act more like owners.

How one feels about the Employee Free Choice Act comes down to how one feels about unions.

Any student of the American workplace knows that many worker benefits and working conditions are due to unionization. But one also knows that some unions have tarnished public opinion about collective bargaining.

And, in a land where entrepreneurship and Horatio Alger up-from-the-bootstraps stories are prized, many workers want to prosper on individual merit.

Advocates of the act believe that the balance of power has tipped too far in favor of employers and that individual workers aren’t getting their fair share of corporate and executive profits.

Opponents think the power lies just where it should.

http://www.kansascity.com/196/story/921188.html

Juice readers. “The card-check process does not give employees a choice at all. Instead, it gives union organizers the choice of whether to organize through a card check process. If the union chose to submit authorization cards, workers would be barred from seeking an election.” Further, “those employees who do not want a union do not have a voice and are in effect removed from the process of making decisions about their jobs.”

In your opinion, how should our Orange County Congressional representatives and Senators Boxer and Feinstein vote on this Bill?

About Larry Gilbert