RILA supports workers’ rights to freedom of association, as well as the freedom of contract, allowing employees and employers to bargain over the terms of their own agreements without government interference. RILA further supports legislation that would preserve employees’ access to a federally supervised private ballot election when deciding whether or not to join a union. RILA has joined the employer community in adamantly opposing the Employee Free Choice Act (S. 560, H.R. 1409), which would strip workers of their fundamental, democratic right to a private ballot vote and also interfere with the ability of workers and employers to bargain freely and come to agreement over working terms and conditions.
This bill is the top union legislative priority because it provides the surest means to increase their rank-and-file membership, which has been steadily declining for decades, now accounting for less than 8 percent of the private workforce. Increased union membership translates to increased union funding that can and will be spent to forward that movement’s political agenda.
Because President Barack Obama has repeatedly stated his desire to sign the legislation into law and the bill likely has enough support to pass the House, the endgame is in the Senate where efforts to inform moderate Republicans and Democrats have been ongoing for nearly three years. At the beginning of the 111th Congress, conventional wisdom was that EFCA would be brought up for a vote in January and signed into law soon thereafter. However, because of the leadership that RILA and our partner advocacy organizations have played, key moderate Democrats such as Sens. Arlen Specter (D-PA), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and Ben Nelson (D-NE) have publicly stated their concerns with the bill and forced union leaders back to the drawing board.
This Congress, the bill was not introduced until March 10—three months after its expected release, and with fewer co-sponsors than in the 110th Congress. Soon thereafter, a number of the Senate’s moderate Democrats publicly expressed discomfort with the bill. Among those speaking unfavorably about the legislation are Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA). These moderates have remained unwilling to support the legislation as written and have restated their position frequently, thus, to date, preventing the bill from moving forward.
Despite the campaign’s success to date, the battle is not over. Dangerous talks of compromise have been rumored. RILA and the broader business community remain firm that true labor law reform cannot be discussed with EFCA as the starting place for negotiations. The unreasonableness of EFCA as a starting platform is evidenced in the “compromises” floated by Big Labor in recent months, including mail-in ballots that further incent organizers to harass employees at their homes, granting unions “equal access” to employees on the clock to pitch the merits of joining, and last best offer arbitration which still retains a government arbiter’s ability to determine employee contracts. Thus far, neither moderate Democrats nor business leaders appear to be listening to these ideas. However, RILA recognizes that this position could change at any moment and maintains close relationships with key policymakers and their staffs to ensure we maintain the upper hand on this issue.
RILA has been a leading voice in opposition to EFCA. As the process moves forward, we must continue to remain completely united in opposition to any compromise. EFCA proponents would love nothing more than to fracture the business community – and will exploit any perceived divisions in an effort to entice other companies to jump on the “compromise bandwagon.” Any talk of compromise now will simply pave the way to a union victory on a law that will be dangerously close to EFCA.
RILA continues to work with member companies and with the broader business community to educate retail employees, the general public and members of Congress about the impact this broad-sweeping bill would have on our industry. RILA has partnered with the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace, the Workforce Fairness Institute, the Alliance to Save Main Street Jobs, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, various state and local trade associations and others to ensure that our employees retain their rights to a private ballot and a say in their wages, benefits and working conditions.
RILA continues to work closely with state retail associations, and other state-based partners, to monitor and defeat state legislation relative to secret ballots and mandatory arbitration. RILA also serves as chair of the Coalition for a Democratic Workforce Grassroots Committee and work with state-based coalitions located in states critical to this debate.
Member Action Needed
We must remain vigilant that EFCA be taken off the table before any other labor law reforms are discussed. It is absolutely critical that the business community continue to engage and weigh in with moderate Democrats and Republicans and urge them to oppose EFCA or anything closely resembling this bill.
The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) has three components: 1) effectively replace secret ballot elections with a “card check” system of organizing, 2) provide a path for the federal government to dictate employment contract terms for two years, and 3) increase employer penalties for committing unfair labor practices.
Under the current organizing process, when 30 percent or more of employees file a petition, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) administers a secret ballot vote. If a majority of employees vote in favor, then the union is recognized as the exclusive bargaining agent for all workers at that workplace and management is instructed to bargain a new employee contract with the union. This system works: NLRB data shows that unions won 62.4 percent of all representation elections in fiscal year 2008, and more than half of all representation elections in each of the past 10 years.
EFCA would circumvent a worker’s right to a private ballot vote in union certification elections. The legislation would instead force workers into a union once union organizers have obtained signatures indicating support for a union from 50 percent plus one additional worker in any bargaining unit. These worker signatures may be collected anywhere—even at an employee’s home or place of worship—and no rules govern how many times a worker may be approached or what the employee is promised in return for signing the petition.
In addition, compulsory binding arbitration as required by this legislation would be an unprecedented government intrusion into the right to bargain freely over working terms and conditions, would take away the right of members of a newly recognized union to accept or reject a contract, and would overturn nearly 60 years of law and precedent on collective bargaining. Workers and managers alike would be bound for two years by a contract.
Finally, the bill would provide excessively punitive penalties that apply only to employers (not to unions) that interfere illegally with organizing drives.
If enacted, EFCA could lead to the intimidation of workers, forcing them to cast their vote in front of union organizers and fellow employees who support unionization. It would also deny those workers, as well as all who declined to sign the card, the right to a private ballot vote to officially recognize the union.
Last Congress, the House passed the Employee Free Choice Act primarily along party lines, 241 to 185. The bill then moved to the Senate, where it failed to overcome a 60-vote procedural threshold to proceed to a vote on its substance. The procedural vote was along party lines, 51 to 48, with the exception of Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA), then a Republican. However, with President Bush in the White House pledging to veto the bill, some members believed they could support the proposal without fear of it actually being implemented into law.
For more information, please contact Katherine Lugar, executive vice president of public affairs, at katherine.lugar@rila.org.