I received an email from some group last night complaining about American for Prosperity’s statewide efforts
today (in Greensboro) and tomorrow (in Raleigh) against the Employee
Free Choice Act.  I don’t want to mention the organizations
because they don’t deserve the attention.  They should be
embarrassed by the email.

According to the email:

“The Employee Free Choice Act is a straightforward and simple bill,
only 3 pages long. Contrary to AFP?s self-serving rhetoric, it does not
remove the secret ballot system at all.”

Three pages long–wow, maybe they are right, it can’t be that bad!

Now the facts:

Under
current law, if a union can obtain authorization cards (card check)
from 30 percent of a company’s workers, then the National Labor
Relations Board (NLRB) must direct a secret election allowing employees
to determine if they want the union.

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA)
does away with secret elections: If a union can get a majority of the
workers to fill out the authorization cards, then the NLRB may not
direct an election–the union is automatically formed.

Actual language from the EFCA:

“If the Board finds that a majority of the employees in a unit
appropriate for bargaining has signed valid authorizations designating
the individual or labor organization specified in the petition as their
bargaining representative…the Board [NLRB] shall not direct an
election but shall certify the individual or labor organization as the
representative…”

Don’t trust the actual language of the bill–think I’m tricking you?  Here’s the CRS Summary of the bill:

“Amends the National Labor Relations Act to require the National Labor
Relations Board to certify a bargaining representative without
directing an election if a majority of the bargaining unit employees
have authorized designation of the representative (card-check) and
there is no other individual or labor organization currently certified
or recognized as the exclusive representative of any of the employees
in the unit.”

Seems to me, and I admit that I do get influenced
by direct and unambiguous language, that the EFCA does away with secret
ballots exactly like what has been been claimed by many organizations and experts, including AFP.

I can hear the argument now: But a majority of the workers wanted
the union, so what’s the big deal if there’s no vote?  I don’t
know, how about some people don’t want to be sleeping with the fishes
and will do whatever is asked?

From this very helpful Heritage Foundation study in which they cite the AFL-CIO:

“Unions regularly submit publicly signed authorization cards from a
large majority of a company’s workers only to see the workers reject
the union in the privacy of the voting booth.  In a study of
organizing campaigns, the AFL-CIO admitted that ‘it is not until the
union obtains signatures from 75% or more of the unit that the union
has more than a 50% likelihood of winning the election.'”

This whole issue is about secret elections and allowing employees to
choose for themselves, without fear, whether they want to become a part
of a union.  The EFCA is a hilarious name for a bill that
restricts free choice–it should be called the Union Imposed Choice Act.

For more information, Professor Richard Epstein has done a new report on the EFCA that looks at the impact of the bill.