Ronald Brownstein of the LA Times reports: “Labor’s Push for Reform Finds Solidarity With Kerry, Edwards”
Is the deck stacked against workers who want to organize unions? Leaders of the AFL-CIO have been making that case for years. And now, with little notice, the leading contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination have joined them.
Sens. John F. Kerry and John Edwards have endorsed the most ambitious attempt to strengthen organized labor since a Senate filibuster blocked President Carter’s effort to rewrite the labor laws 26 years ago. Each man is touting a fundamental shift in federal labor law that could give unions their last, best chance of reversing the long slide that has reduced their share of the workforce from a high of almost 35% in 1954 to 13% today. . . .
Today, almost all unions are organized in a two-step process. First, labor organizers must convince at least 30% of a firm’s workers to sign cards supporting unionization. Then a majority of the firm’s workers must vote in an election to join the union.
As Kerry and Edwards noted, employers have stiffened their resistance in those election campaigns, utilizing tactics that unions say intimidate workers — like firing activists or interminably delaying the vote. The result has been that unions lose most representation elections, especially at firms that actively oppose them.
“The way the law gets played out today in union organizing campaigns, it is very, very difficult for unions to win,” says Fred Feinstein, the general counsel at the National Labor Relations Board under Clinton..
Actually, NLRB statistics show that unions win roughly half the elections.
Kerry and Edwards would reshape the playing field with a reform known as card-check recognition. That would force employers to recognize a union if a majority of workers simply sign cards or petitions indicating they want to join.
By eliminating the election stage where management exerts its greatest leverage, that approach could greatly increase labor’s prospects of adding new members. To underscore the point, Kerry and Edwards would also toughen penalties on companies that use unfair labor practices, and establish time limits, with binding arbitration, for firms to reach an initial contract with a new union. Kerry says he would even give preference in federal contracts to companies that remain neutral in organizing drives.
In endorsing these ideas, Kerry insists his aim isn’t to increase the number of workers belonging to unions. “That’s not the goal,” he said. “The goal is to empower people to do what they want to do; let people have a choice. I’m not going to go out and say you ought to do this or do that. That’s not my role.”
But while Kerry and Edwards present these changes as a matter of economic fairness, the prospect of more union members offers obvious political benefits to the Democrats [due to organized labor being such a strong Democratic constituency].
The argument against card-check recognition is compellingly presented by the National Institute for Labor Relations Research in “Big Labor’s Cockamamie Campaign Against Secret-Ballot Elections For Workers”
From my perspective, there are several reasons why reliance on cards signed by workers as a means of “empower[ing] people to do what they want to do,” as Kerry says, is an unreliable indicator of true employee sentiment.
First, it is not unheard of, perhaps it is even common, for union supporters to obtain signatures by telling employees that the purpose of the cards is merely to obtain an election.
Second, employers do not have a monopoly on coercion and intimidation of employees. Even moderate peer pressure may cause employees to sign cards even if they are not personally in favor of the union. In contrast, a secret ballot election conducted by the NLRB allows employees to truly state their preference, without fear of anyone knowing how they voted.
A much better “reform,” if one is truly needed, which I doubt, would be a reduction in the percentage support required for an election to be held. I believe this would not require legislation, as the percentage has been administratively set by the NLRB and is not statutory.
Sphere: Related ContentIf you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing.
Subscribe by RSS
Subscribe by Email
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment