News

December 2, 2008

Union-friendly bill controversial

New Senate expected to vote on Employee Free Choice Act in Jan.

By Steve Mocarsky smocarsky@timesleader.com
Staff Writer
Steve Mocarsky on Facebook   |   @TLSteveMocarsky on Twitter

Among the first pieces of legislation expected to be brought up for a vote in the U.S. Senate after President-elect Barack Obama takes office in January is the controversial Employee Free Choice Act.

It’s a proposed law that proponents say would make it easier for unions to organize and ultimately result in higher wages and better working conditions for employees in Northeastern Pennsylvania and across the country.

Opponents argue the act would allow unions and coworkers to coerce and intimidate employees into joining unions and could eventually result in layoffs or company closures if unions were formed and wages and benefits were increased beyond what employers can afford to pay.

Under current law – the National Labor Relations Act – a secret-ballot election among employees is required if representation by a union is disputed after an organizing attempt in which more than 30 percent of employees requested representation.

The Employee Free Choice Act would amend the rules by eliminating the secret-ballot requirement if more than 50 percent of a company’s employees sign cards indicating they favor representation by a specific union – the card check process.

Under the act, a union could demand that an employer begin bargaining 10 days after the National Labor Relations Board recognizes that the union is certified by the card check.

The U.S. House of Representatives passed the act in March 2007. But the legislation was stalled in the Senate by a tie vote, mostly along party lines, with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing it.

A new Democratic majority is expected to revive the legislation next year, and Obama has vowed to sign the bill if it reaches his desk.

‘Good when economy good’

Darlene Robbins, president of the Northeastern Pennsylvania Manufacturers and Employers Association, said the act might be “a good idea when the economy is good,” but right now, it’s a “horrible idea.”

“Our policy makers focused on true economic stimulus should not support it because it harms our economic growth and our ability to create jobs,” Robbins said.

Robbins said the association represents union and non-union companies, but the association doesn’t track membership based on union or non-union status. She said a majority of her organization’s membership opposes the act, based on calls she has received from employers.

She said employees’ signatures under the card-check system would be made public to union organizers and coworkers.

“Secret ballots are the only way to protect an employee’s freedom to choose without subtle or overt coercion,” Robbins said.

‘A critical reform’

Neal Bisno, president of Service Employees International Union Healthcare PA, heralds the act as “a critical reform that will rebuild the American economy from the ground up by restoring employee free choice to come together, advocate for themselves, their families and the people that they serve.”

Bisno said the act would ensure that in order for a union to form, a “clear majority” of employees would support it, “not just people who happen to attend an election.”

Bisno said employers have learned to stall and delay the unionization process and intimidate employees.

Pat Connors, principal officer of Teamsters Local 401 in Wilkes-Barre, said unions currently need 30 percent of employees to sign union cards to even get a vote. His union tries to get 50 to 60 percent of employees to sign cards.

“We’ve had places where we got 100 percent. Then, by the time the election comes around, we lose a vote,” Connors said.

Connors said employers typically resist unionization attempts because studies show that union companies generally pay higher wages and better benefits and offer better working conditions than non-union companies. That cuts into employer profits.

Specter, Casey are backers

Both Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Philadelphia, and Sen. Robert Casey, D-Scranton, voted for the card check legislation in 2007 and expect to vote in favor of it next year.

Opponents have said that Democrats generally support the bill as a way to show their appreciation to unions that donated to them in past elections.

Casey received at least $9,000 in campaign contributions from various unions this year and at least $352,000 in union contributions since 2005.

But Casey spokesman Larry Smar said allegations of a quid pro quo are “way off base.

“Sen. Casey is motivated by the best interests of workers that are too often getting the short end of the stick, especially in the current economy. If the Republican critics persist, they should look at the contributions they have received from the corporate opponents of the legislation,” Smar said.

Smar also said that although many people believe the act takes away an employee’s right to a secret-ballot election, “if workers want an election, they can have an election.”

Specter, whom many describe as a moderate Republican and who received at least $50,000 in campaign contributions from various unions this year and at least $246,000 in union contributions since 1997, made a strong argument for the act in a speech on the Senate floor in June 2007 before the vote.

Specter said he had received numerous impassioned contacts about the bill, both for and against it.

He pointed out that the courts have held that the secret ballot is “preferable but not exclusive.”

“The Supreme Court held that ‘an employer has no right to a secret ballot where the employer has so poisoned the environment through unfair labor practices that a fair election is not possible,’ ” Specter said.

Specter said practices of the National Labor Relations Board cause unacceptable delays. “By the time the NLRB and the legal process has worked through, the delays are so long that there is no longer a meaningful election.”

He said the Senate should consider passing the legislation because the National Labor Relations Board “is not functioning at all … it is dysfunctional,” he said.

Steve Mocarsky, a Times Leader staff writer, may be reached at 459-2005.

Tweet	Follow @TLnews

This story also appears on the following websites...