thetruthaboutefca.com | The Truth About The Employee Free Choice Act & Card Check

There’s a fantastic letter to the editor running up in Detroit that discusses the all-too-infrequently discussed binding interest arbitration provision of the Employee Free Choice Act. James Wahlman of Troy writes in:

Parties to first contracts could arbitrate their issues now, but rarely do, because they would be turning over their wages, benefits and working conditions to a third party who probably has little or no expertise in the parties’ business, no practical experience in their operations and, most important, will not have to live with the consequences of the decision.

The very important business of labor relations and bargaining is best left to the parties involved, no matter how imperfect the process may be.

Indeed, even the best-intentioned arbitrator can not know the full business needs of any firm or any single workforce. It’s like asking a general practitioner to do open heart surgery: you could get lucky, but more than likely the patient isn’t going to make it.

To leave an employer and employees in such a position as to have their interests superseded by a government bureaucrat is to totally abdicate business and moral responsibility.

Deborah Sutton of New Jersey has strong opinions on the Employee Free Choice Act and that makes hers the letter to the editor of the day when it comes to card check:

What many union members do not understand is that this legislation, if enacted, would have them give up their right to a private vote in these representation elections.

No longer will you be able to cast ballots based upon your belief in private. The votes can be scrutinized by the public. Or, may I be so bold to say, union officials will have to approve of how you vote.

So “thank you” to these congressmen from South Jersey who are listed as co-sponsors: Rob Andrews, D-1st Dist.; Frank LoBiondo, R-2nd Dist.; John Adler, D-3rd Dist; Chris Smith, R-4th Dist.; Rush Holt, D-12th Dist.

Fresh off the announcement that cable network CNBC named Virginia the best state for business — an honor received by the state’s governor, Democrat Tim Kaine — the issue of card check continues to loom in the state’s gubernatorial race to replace Kaine. A letter from William Card of Dumfries, Virginia, has some good thoughts:

Watching the crushing economic results that follow Democratic leadership coupled with pervasive unions (Detroit comes to mind), it sounds the alarm when someone like Democratic gubernatorial candidate Creigh Deeds seems to be in the bag for big labor.

Between the hundreds of thousands of dollars big labor have donated to his campaign and his statement that as governor big labor “won’t just have a friend in Richmond, you’ll have a partner,” we have reason to fear Creigh Deeds. With membership declining, unions have seized on Card Check as a way to strong-arm employees into organized labor.

Creigh Deeds appears to be a willing pawn in that game. Meanwhile, former Attorney General Bob McDonnell has forcefully announced his intention to fight for Virginia jobs.

Do we follow the disastrous path of Michigan with Creigh Deeds? Or do we follow our own path with a proven leader like Bob McDonnell? Card Check is wrong for a free people and particularly wrong for Virginia.

In the Chicago Tribune, Mary Halm writes:

Eliminating the voice of the employer, and the employee in some circumstances, seems like an odd way to go about giving workers a direct path to form unions. Toughening penalties against employers who break the law sounds fair, except the bill would not toughen penalties against unions that break the law. And, binding arbitration – which would essentially put business decisions in the hands of a government bureaucrat – would eliminate jobs and drive up the cost of doing business in Illinois and the rest of the country.

Small business owners are the engine of America, not the government, and definitely not the unions. It seems to me this bill should not only be “compromised;” it should be killed.

More local opinion from across the nation continues to roll in against the sadly misnamed Employee Free Choice Act.

Gary Gardner from Springfield, Missouri writes:

Does anyone think the employees who vote publicly and openly against the union by signing a card won’t be harassed by the union? Just remember the union strike at Associated Wholesale Grocers awhile back when the union didn’t get their way, and how they vandalized merchandise in affiliated grocery store and assaulted a worker who drove an AWG truck just trying to feed his family.

If employees want to vote on a union that is their right; however if they want a fair and harassment-free vote, they’re much safer voting by secret ballot instead of a forced card check.

Meanwhile, Dawn Sutter from Pocono Lake, California writes:

This expansion of government power is almost like re-establishing wage and price controls in our economy, and could put many employers out of business. With the current state of the economy, do we really need to put more employers out of business?

A great letter from Chris Taylor in the Daily Reflector:

In my previous career, I worked for 30 years in manufacturing operations for two international companies. I worked in both non-union and union plants.

I have worked with five different unions including the Teamsters and UAW. I have seen first hand the advantages of a non-union plant. Employees can talk with their supervisors and managers without the need for union representation. In a union-based operation, an employee can lose their individuality and their voice in the workplace. Their union representative often speaks for them.

A union contract is very lengthy and often open to interpretation. Much time is wasted in employee/union/management meetings. This wasted time leads to a loss in productivity, decreased employee morale and can lead to conflict with management as well as fellow employees. Product quality can suffer. Smaller companies as well as larger companies incur additional costs which makes them less competitive. With the downturn in the current economy, we do not need legislation that would undermine our nation’s competitiveness. Currently, members of Congress are debating a dangerous piece of legislation falsely called the Employee Free Choice Act. This act has nothing to do with freedom, in fact it denies the employee’s right to a secret ballot, nor does it serve the interests of America’s workforce. Furthermore, the act targets small businesses with three or more employees. Based on my experience of 30 years, I can confidently say this act will expand union membership and contract our local economy. Contact your elected officials in Washington and urge them to oppose the Employee Free Choice Act.