The Employee Free Choice Act

Congress is currently in the process of doing something very important: stopping a bully. Normally when you hear the term "bully" it is in the context of international relations. That is not the case this time, however.

The bullies in this case are businesses with non-unionized employees. Under current U.S. law, if a certain percentage of employees sign a card saying they would like to consider unionization, then the company hosts a secret ballot election for the employees to determine if they will unionize.

That sounds fair, except for one major problem. The employer gets to decide the rules of the election. For example, if they want to make the election at 6 a.m. and not announce it (except to people who will vote against it), they can do that. If they want to force all employees to sit through a presentation about why it is a bad idea to unionize, they can do that. If they want to bar any pro-union people from distributing any information presenting their side, they can do that. The system is rigged.

The Employee Free Choice Act would “solve” these problems. If more than 50% of the members sign a card expressing interest in unionizing, then the election will be bypassed. (There will still be a secret ballot vote if 30% of employees publicly petition for an election.) This way management cannot manipulate the rules of the elections.

But this “solution” creates a new fundamental problem. The old system unfairly favored business. The new system unfairly favors the union organizers. Ask yourself why the union organizers would not want a secret ballot election if they already had a majority of the employees sign cards expressing that they wanted to unionize. They already have a majority, right?

Well, not necessarily. Union organizers have been known to “encourage” hesitant individuals to sign those cards. Some of my relatives have been socially ostracized for not supporting a union. One of my relatives (a truck driver) was “encouraged” to sign the card while a very large man holding a very large knife was watching intently. The truth of the matter is that just because a majority of the employees publicly signed a card saying they wanted to join a union does not mean a majority actually wanted to join a union. This is why it is so important to actually have a secret ballot. And the 30% exception does not help matters because you must get 30% of the employees to publicly stand up to their fellow workers.

So, the old situation is inherently unfair. The proposed solution is inherently unfair. What should be done? I propose common sense (I know, radical thought). How about having a secret ballot election that is run by a neutral party, such as a government agency? With a government body regulating the election, neither side is likely to try traditional manipulative and bullying tactics.

Now I have to say that I am quite certain that my proposal would not pass Congress. The Republicans are largely in the hip pocket of big business. The Democrats are largely in the hip pocket of big labor. Neither side will budge. What will probably happen is that the bill will pass in this Congress. Then when the Republicans regain Congress, everything will revert to the old rules. Welcome to politics.