Saturday’s New York Times had a lengthy piece by Steven Greenhouse about the growing chorus for the Employee Free Choice Act, a bill that would restore free choice for people who want to join a union.
Towards the end of the article is a simple sentence that bears further examination, because it gets to the heart of why we need Employee Free Choice: the coercive campaign to which companies subject their employees in their efforts to stop workers from organizing.
Union officials say they do not dislike the secret ballot, but rather the lengthy, expensive, adversarial campaign before the vote in which companies often fire union supporters and use videos, large meetings and one-on-one sessions to pressure employees to vote against unionizing.
I’m going to attempt to cut to the core of why we need free choice restored for employees. Why do I say "restored"? Because for people who want to form a union today, there are essentially two ways you can do so:
- Work out an agreement with your employer to recognize the union when a majority of workers say they want one. (About 500,000 people have done this in the US in the last 5 years.)
- Get really lucky after your employer forces a "lengthy, expensive, adversarial" campaign when they refuse to recognize your union.
Hang with me here, because it’s really important to understand how this works in order to know why we need the Employee Free Choice Act.
Workers want to form or join a union because they feel the need to stand together with their colleagues to protect their interests on the job. Their interests could be things like workplace safety for construction workers, safe staffing levels for nurses, or decent wages and benefits for grocery store workers. They feel they’re not being respected or treated well enough, and they make the significant decision to come together in a union to stand up for each other.
Make no mistake: it’s a big deal for workers to take this step. You’re deciding to officially come together, to ask to negotiate collectively with your employer, to stand up for yourselves as a group so you can provide for your families.
At this point, people who want to form a union sign cards that express their intent to do so. Now, the law says the workers can request to vote for a union with only 30% of the employees who sign cards. But what usually happens is at least 50%, and usually upwards of 60% or 70%, of workers will sign cards saying they want to form a union. Like I said, it’s a big step to come this far, and in order to be successful you need to have strong solidarity among your coworkers.
Now once the employees know they have a majority of support for forming a union, they approach their employer and ask that the company recognize the employees’ union and sit down to negotiate a contract.
Here’s where the roads diverge. There are some companies who immediately recognize their employees’ unions. Indeed, some big name companies do just that, including AT&T, Harley Davidson, and Kaiser Permanente, because they see a partnership with their workers as a competitive advantage.
But many, many other companies laugh at the majority of workers who want a union, and demand that the majority of workers again show they want a union in a "secret ballot election,"- which occurs after what Greenhouse described as "the lengthy, expensive, adversarial campaign before the vote in which companies often fire union supporters and use videos, large meetings and one-on-one sessions to pressure employees to vote against unionizing."
What does this campaign look like?
About 49 percent of employers openly threaten to close down a worksite when faced with a unionization drive. Untold more tell individual workers, in captive meetings, that jobs will be lost. 30 percent make good on the threat in real time, firing workers who engage in union activities. 82 percent hire unionbusting consulting firms which teach them how to most effectively shutter a union drive while either technically staying in the limits of the law, or breaking it in such a way that the gains will outweigh the eventual fines.
"Get really lucky," as I called option #2 for how to form unions today, entails somehow retaining a majority of supporters of a union after the multi-week intimidation campaign carried out by the same people who write your paycheck.
I need to again quote Ezra Klein at length because he explains these intimidation campaigns so well:
You hear a fair amount of talk about card check — also known as the Employee Free Choice Act — and you hear a lot of folks on the Right earnestly wring their hands over the idea that if workers sign cards in order to unionize, they will be intimidated! Pressured! The sanctity of the secret vote will be shattered! Which would all be fair enough, if these same folks evinced even an ounce of concern that workers are currently being threatened, intimidated, and even fired if they dare try and organize. [...]
Hearing the status quo defended as free and fair is like imagining a presidential election where you can vote however you’d like, but anyone who votes against the incumbent party is informed they will lose all access to Social Security, Medicare, and the protection of their local police and fire departments. Also, they’ll be audited. But nevertheless: Folks can vote however they want.
That’s the state of "free choice" in America for people who want to form unions. That’s why I said we need to restore free choice with the Employee Free Choice Act.
The Employee Free Choice Act says companies need to recognize their employees’ unions when a majority of them say they want to form a union. It’s a system called "majority sign-up" because it recognizes the democratic principle of 50% +1, and respects the workers’ free choice.
The Employee Free Choice Act has the support of almost every single Democrat in Congress, as well as some Republicans. In 2007 the bill cleared the House and got 51 votes in the Senate but was stopped by the threat of a Republican filibuster and veto by Bush. This year, a majority of voters support Employee Free Choice, and rejected a multi-million dollar campaign funded by wealthy CEOs opposed to the bill. Employee Free Choice is key to help rebuild the middle class. President-elect Obama supports Employee Free Choice and has promised to sign the bill as President.
Even though we will have President Obama and a solid pro-worker majority in the Senate, the Employee Free Choice Act is going to be a big battle. We’re encountering a well-funded opposition that’s dedicated to destroying this bill with false characterizations and misinformation.
But for the sake of America’s workers – for the chance to rebuild the middle class and make the American Dream a reality – the fight for the Employee Free Choice Act will be an essential one to win. Join our campaign to support Employee Free Choice.
Related posts:
- Exclusive: New Poll Shows Clear Majorities Distrust Big Corporations, Favor Unions
- Name FDL’s Newest Blog about Labor, Workers, and Unions
- The Max Tax: Rewarding Wal-Mart for Impoverishing Employees
- Reid, Wyden, Baucus Reach Agreement on Version of Free Choice Amendment
- Chamber of Commerce’s “Buy an Economist” Health Care Strategy Identical to its Anti-Employee Free Choice Campaign





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Dugg
And please also Digg
There was a lengthy op-ed today in the Philadelphia Inquirer today written by someone at one of the big local law firms. They claimed we don’t need EFCA. You can read it here: How employers can mitigate ‘card check’.
I meant to add that I think the op-ed is full of crap. Just wanted to post that op-ed so we know what we are up against.
Matt Stoller actually wrote about that today. Check it out:
We need the Employee Free Choice Act! We tried to organize into a union at my workplace a few years ago and we had a majority of workers signing union cards. But after we informed management and tried to get an election schedules, our boss held closed door meetings with selected workers and threatened them, threatened to close the operation down, refused vacation scheduling to union supporters, and many other tactics. The support for the union collapsed after a few weeks because of the unfair pressure from the employer. If a majority of the workers signs cards supporting the union, then the employer should have to recognize the workers and their union.
I personally believe employees should be given the choice to opt OUT of unions, I believe everyone should be automatically assigned a union and then if they don’t like it they can opt out
if no union exists for an industry one needs to be created or their needs to be a default labor union
bing, problem solved
unions are a simple concept that is always misrepresented
all a union does is allow the laborer to bargain for their product at the fair wage for that industry
just as an industry doesn’t set the price when it buys steel, the steel refinery sets the price, the industry can at best bargain gut they do not set the price
the same thing needs to be true of labor, the union creates that company who bargains to get the correct market price for that particular skill
Happened where I worked too.
It’s very widespread and the impact is pretty strong. And get this. Every 23 minutes, a worker is fired or discriminated against for supporting a union at work – that’s about 23,000 times a year.
Employers get the Unions they deserve.
I was anti union. Until I left college.
First job, they wanted us to work all week end. All 60 hours, for overtime.
They they cut the overtime pay to 24 hours of the time, and still wanted us to work 60.
The 60 was awarded as “time in lieu”.
Then we lost the time in lieu, because “the project” ended.
Then I realized all the words I had heard about unions and employees had left out management behavior.
Management behavior – management get the unions they deserve.
Thanks. I didn’t know that WolfBlock is one of those types of firms. Now I know. Figures the Inqy would print that garbage.
This is the first post I’ve read on the subject that explains the process in a way that allows me to fully understand it. Thanks.
As I said in an email to a friend who owns a mfg corp and wants to know why unions are against a secret ballot: why vote twice?
Absolutely. Robert Rubin and Jared Bernstein co-authored an op-ed in the New York Times a week ago that argued just that:
I’m a card carrying, dues paying member of the IWW. IMO the leadership of the AFL-CIO and SEIU have sold out the workers in their unions. When I worked at VA the shop steward for AFGE spent more time helping management screw the employees than anything else. I don’t see much different happening with AFL-CIO and SEIU. I found the SEIU efforts in Puerto Rico wrt teachers unacceptable.
That’s true too.
But here’s the problem. Without unions, workers have no power (unless unemployment is so low that corps are forced to bid workers away from each other, 4% or lower). With unions, workers may also have no power if union leaders are corrupt, a far too frequent event.
But unionization is a threshhold event. After that, you gotta deal with the leaders in all the difficult ways we try to deal with our corrupt, unresponsive political leaders.
OT
KO show getting too big. Going downhill now, with Thomas Friedman (moderate command of the obvious guy) as a guest.
IMO any union’s a great union! For full disclosure, I’m an online organizer with SEIU but can’t speak to your specific points here… I do want to acknowledge that while some people might have complaints about this or that organization, in the end, we are all working towards the end goal of respect and justice for working people, we just have different ways of getting there. :)
Oh, I’m all for unions and it’s the problem with union leadership being in bed with management that pisses me off, regardless of what union it is.
Any worker can join the IWW, anytime. Workers can join on their own and management can be presented with a fait accompli if all or a majority of workers are already union members.
KO just inked a 4 year, $30M deal with M$NBC. Hopefully, he’ll discuss things with Flat Earth Tom we’d never hear anywhere else. KO ain’t Charlie Rose.
Dugg!
Joined
and I AM THERE!
i come from HUGE Union People!
Thanks for this Michael.
I’m gonna pass it around now.
Dugg!
The closing words of Redeker’s op-ed are revealing.
Basically, as long as management can count on its ability to browbeat workers going into a union election, there’s no need to improve the workplace. Screw labor, they can’t go anywhere else.
At my university, our classified staff (secretarial, clerical and janitorial employees) organized about three years ago. I was ashamed of the behavior of our administration. The VP for Business affairs said he’d retire before he allowed a union on his campus. So he refused to accept the card check, and demanded an election. The Board of Regents backed him. The administration browbeat classified staff and some faculty who supervised classified staff joined in.
When the election was held and the votes counted in public, people applauded (politely) at each YES vote. The VP for Business threatened to clear the room if people weren’t quiet. The union carried 70% for, 30% against.
Most of classified staff I know are fairly content with the union. The VP has retired, rather than deal with a union.
It’s a small victory, but every one moves things forward.
Here’s how secret the “secret” ballot is:
Assume there are 100 employees eligible to vote. 51 must vote yes to carry the issue, NOT the majority of the votes cast (imagine if we elected government officials that way!).
The vote is usually held on the work site. The company has months to tell workers to stay away from the voting site.
So how you vote is not so secret, is it? Showing up is considered a yes vote, staying away is a no vote.
Plus the company will break the law during the campaign. A judge found US Air’s acts way out of line in 1994. The results?
A measly fine and a revote one year later.