union intimidation

A State-Level Counter to Card Check

by Ivan Osorio on January 13, 2009 · 3 comments

in Economy, Labor

As disappointing as the 2005 Kelo v. New London ruling was for supporters of strong property rights, the ensuing months saw a healthy — and heartening — backlash at the state level, as lawmakers in several states, responding to contituent outrage, enacted legislative curbs on eminent domain. Now it would be good to see a similar state-level reaction to organized labor’s push to corral more workers into unions by undermining the secret ballot process in organizing elections.

Today, soon after the pro-union advocacy group American Rights at Work launched a major ad campaign in favor of the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), which would allow unions to easily circumvent secret ballot elections in organizing drives, former Congressman Ernest Istook (R-Okla.) announced a new state-level effort to enshrine secret ballots in all elections — including union elections — in state constitutions.

Istook, who is now at the Heritage Foundation, where he made the announcement, is Chairman of Save our Secret Ballot, which is launching its state efforts in five states — Arizona, Arkansas, Missouri, Nevada, and Utah — with other states to follow. He noted that, contrary to what many people might think, secret ballots are not protected in the U.S. Constitution — but state constitutions can expand on those rights protected at the federal level. The proposed amendment reads:

The right of individuals to vote by secret ballot is fundamental. Where state or federal law requires elections for public office or public votes on initiatives or referenda, or designations or authorizations of employee representation, the right of individuals to vote by secret ballot shall be guaranteed.

Istook also pointed out the hypocrisy of EFCA sponsor Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), who in 2001, along with several of his colleagues, wrote to Mexican government officials urging them to protect Mexican workers’ rights to a secret ballot, because, they said in the letter:

[W]e feel that the secret ballot is absolutely necesary to ensure that workers are not intimidated into voting for a union they might not otherwise choose.

As a questioner noted, EFCA has other provisions that are also very bad: binding arbitration, whereby a federally appointed arbitrator imposes a contract if union and management have not reached a deal after 120 days, and increased “unfair labor practice” penalties for employers, which gives unions another club with which to browbeat companies targeted for unionization.

Istook responded that while opposing those provisions is also important, they are, relative to card check, a secondary priority for Big Labor — which, if it would settle on enactment of a card check-free EFCA-lite, would only do so to come back later in order to get the rest of its desired package.

Here’s hoping Istook’s efforts succeed.

For more on card check, see here and here.

Prospects for Card Check in the Obama Administration

by Ivan Osorio on November 5, 2008 · 1 comment

in Economy

Organized labor came out big for Barack Obama and other Democrats running for offices across the country, so we can expect the unions to demand the victorious Dems to enact legislation they want.

Chief among union priorities is the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), which would allow unions to circumvent secret balloting in union organizing elections. EFCA would allow a union to be recognized by the National Labor Relations Board as the exclusive bargaining agent for workers at a workplace if a majority of them signed union cards — a procedure known as “card check.” This would expose workers to high-pressure intimidation tactics which secret ballots are intended to avoid.

EFCA would also impose a system of binding arbitration, whereby a federally appointed arbitrator would impose a contract whenever labor and management cannot come to an agreement after the period of time stated in the law. (The current version of EFCA has a period of 120 days.)

The unions hope this measure will help them stem decades of membership decline in the private sector. But the reason for that decline is that the American economy has changed a lot since the era when unions were ascendant.

With the U.S. economy in the state it’s in, legislating card check and binding arbitration would be particularly harmful. One key to the resiliency of America’s economy is the nation’s flexible labor market. Introducing rigidities like these would impose costs not only on businesses, but also on workers, many of whom could face fewer job options as employers put off hiring decisions in the face of increased costs imposed on them by EFCA.

With the Democrats’ 60-seat Senate supermajority looking unlikely, Senate Republicans may be able to block some of the worst legislation to come before them. EFCA should be at the top of that category.

For more on card check, see here, here, and here.