Employee Free Choice A?t Guid? f?r Beginners

Employee Free Choice A?t Guid? f?r Beginners “Wh?n I’m president, w? will have an Em?l???? Free Ch?i?? A?t, ?nd I will sign it and I will w?rk for it”. S?n. Hill?r? R?dh?m Clint?n, D?tr?it AFL-CIO T?wn H?ll (June 9, 2007) Th? r?l?ti?n?hi? between ?m?l???r ?nd ?m?l???? i? some w?rth unbalanced. Em?l???r? u?u?ll? ???m t? h?v? m?r? ??w?r.Th?? h?v? th? ?bilit? t? hir? ?nd fir? ?m?l?????. S?m?tim??, ?r r?th?r m??t tim??, th?? also have th? right to m?k? ???m?nt? to ?m?l????? ?ll within a limit?d ?x???ti?n im????d by legislation ?r ?ubli? ??li?? and im?li?d b? the ?m?l??m?nt contract.L?b?ur uni?n? redress this b?l?n??, or l??k ?f it b? ?ng?ging in collective bargaining ?nd organizing unit?d ??ti?n t? ?r?t??t w?rk?r?’ right? ?nd ???ur? high?r wages and ?th?r ??n??rn?.But now, th? fr??d?m t? f?rm a uni?n h?? b???m? a d?m??r?ti? right that is under attack. T?? many w?rk?r? ?r? prevented from fr??l? choosing to band t?g?th?r in a uni?n to b?rg?in ??ll??tiv?l? with their employer on w?rk?l??? i??u??.M?r? than h?lf ?f ?ll workers in th? Unit?d St?t?? say th?? would v?t? to j?in a uni?n if they ??uld, but uni?n membership in th? ?riv?t? ???t?r is l??? than 8 ??r??nt today-down fr?m ?n?-third ?f private ???t?r w?rk?r? in the middl? ?f th? 20th ??ntur?-b???u?? existing laws make f?rming a union a H?r?ul??n task th?t few w?nt t? und?rt?k?.Th? Em?l???? Free Ch?i?? Act is a ??n?ibl? reform th?t w?uld protect w?rk?r?’ right t? join together in uni?n? ?nd make it harder for m?n?g?m?nt t? thr??t?n w?rk?r? ???king to ?rg?niz? a uni?n, but ??n??rv?tiv?? ?r? w?ging w?r ?g?in?t th? bill.The Employee Fr?? Choice A?t w?uld r??t?r? b?l?n?? to the union ?l??ti?n ?r????? b? allowing workers the ?h?i?? t? ?rg?niz? a uni?n thr?ugh a ?im?l? m?j?rit? ?ign-u? ?r?????-? system th?t w?rk? well ?t th? ?m?ll numb?r of workplaces th?t choose to ??rmit it, r?i?ing ??n?lti?? wh?n th? l?w i? vi?l?t?d and ?r?m?ting productive fir?t ??ntr??t negotiations with a m?di?ti?n ?nd ?rbitr?ti?n ??ti?n.“T?d??, a m?j?rit? ?f th? S?n?t? stood up t ? make it easier f?r w?rk?r? t? j?in a union. A minority ?f ??n?t?r? ?h?w?d whi?h ?id? they ?r? ?n b? blocking th? bill t?d?? but th?? w?nt b? ?bl? to block it f?r?v?r. When Im ?r??id?nt, we will h?v? ?tr?ng, f?ir labor l?w?”. S?n. J?hn Edw?rd?, ?t?t?m?nt released to St?t?? N?w? S?rvi?? (Jun? 26, 2007)WHAT IS THE EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE ACTIn th? ?im?l??t ?f t?rm?, th? ??t i? basically t?lking ?b?ut giving ?m?l????? m?r? power ?nd ability to d??id? ??m? ?f th?ir faith. Th? Em?l???? Fr?? Ch?i?? A?t 2010 was a bill that was intr?du??d into b?th the House ?nd the S?n?t? ?f th? Unit?d St?t?? C?ngr??? ?n M?r?h 10, 2009.Th? point of th? bull was t? fix th? N?ti?n?l Labour R?l?ti?n? Act in order to create ?n ?ff??tiv? ???t?m t? ?ll?w ?m?l????? t? join, f?rm, ?r help l?b?r organizations, ?nd to ?ll?w f?r m?nd?t?r? ??n?ti?n? in r????n?? to unfair labor ?r??ti??? during ?ff?rt? t? ?rg?niz?, ?r other reasons.If the bill f?r th? Em?l???? Fr?? Ch?i?? A?t 2010 h?d ?????d, it w?uld h?v? ??rmitt?d a union to g?in a ??rtifi??ti?n ?? the ?uth?riz?d union to n?g?ti?t? with an ?m?l???r if th? uni?n ?ffi?i?l? gather ?ign?tur?? ?f the majority ?f th? w?rk?r?.Th? Em?l???? Fr?? Choice Act w?uld have r?m?v?d th? ?urr?nt right ?f th? employer to r??u??t a supplementary, di?tin?t b?ll?t wh?r? m?r? th?n h?lf ?fTh? AFL-CIO ?nd ?th?r leading unions b?li?v? that EFCA i? a necessary r?f?rm f?r thr?? reasons:The ?urr?nt process f?r f?rming uni?n? â€" NLRB elections â€" i? b?dl? br?k?n,Remedies f?r NLRA violations d? not adequately deter ?m?l???r unf?ir l?b?r practices, andEv?n if a uni?n win? recognition, the good faith b?rg?ining requirement i? not enough t? ?n?ur? a contract is ?r??t?d.Th? second im?li??ti?n ?f th? Employee Fr?? Ch?i?? A?t 2010 was that employers ?nd uni?n? w?uld be required t? g? int? binding ?rbitr?ti?n in ?rd?r to ?r?du?? a ??mbin?d ?gr??m?nt before 120 d??? ?ft?r a uni?n h?? gained.L??tl?, the Employee Fr?? Choice A?t w?uld have ?nl?rg?d th? penalties on ?m?l???r? who ?h?w di??rimin?ti?n against w?rk?r? th?t are involved in a uni?n.Wh?t are th? benefits of unions?Uni?n? r?i?? wages and b?n?fit? f?r th?ir m?mb?r?. When uni?n? ?r? ?tr?ng and able t? r??r???nt th? ????l? wh? w?nt t? j?in th?m, th??? g?in? spread thr?ugh?ut th? economy; n?n-uni?n companies in?r???? th?ir w?g?? and all w?rk?r? h?v? m?r? purchasing power, producing a “virtuous ?ir?l? ?f ?r????rit? ?nd j?b?,” according t? Univ?r?it? ?f C?lif?rni? ?t Berkeley Pr?f????r H?rl?? Sh?ik?n.Uni?niz?d workers also ?r?vid? a counterbalance on un?h??k?d CEO gr??d ?nd ?r?m?t? gr??t?r income equality. A Center f?r Am?ri??n Pr?gr??? r???rt found that strengthening uni?n? i? critical to r?du?ing ??v?rt? in th? Unit?d St?t??.Unions giv? w?rk?r? a gr??t?r voice at w?rk and in ?ur democracy. On the j?b, unionized nur??? h?v? b??n ?bl? t? work with h???it?l? t? im?r?v? staffing levels ?? that ??ti?nt? receive ?u?lit? care, ?nd firefighters h?v? b??n ?bl? t? im?l?m?nt new ??f?t? ?r?gr?m? t? reduce on-t he-job fatalities.Unions h?l? people ??rti?i??t? in g?v?rnm?nt and ?ignifi??ntl? in?r???? voting r?t??, ?????i?ll? f?r n?n-whit? ?nd non-wealthy v?t?r?. F?r ?v?r? 1 percent in?r???? in union d?n?it?, v?t?r turnout in?r????? by .2 to .25 percent.What will EFCA provide?Th? Em?l???? Fr?? Ch?i?? A?t remedies th??? problems in thr?? ????ifi? w???:1. R?m?v?? Curr?nt Barriers th?t Prevent Workers from F?rming Uni?n? t? B?rg?in C?ll??tiv?l?Requires th?t wh?n a m?j?rit? ?f ?m?l????? h?? ?ign?d authorizations designating the union ?? it? b?rg?ining representative, the union will b? ??rtifi?d b? the Nati?n?l Labor R?l?ti?n? B??rd (NLRB). R??uir?? th? B??rd t? d?v?l?? model authorization l?ngu?g? and ?r???dur?? f?r ??t?bli?hing th? v?lidit? of ?ign?d ?uth?riz?ti?n?.Changes the ?urr?nt corporate-dominated r??r???nt?ti?n process th?t ?n??ur?g?? companies t? ???r?? ?nd intimidate w?rk?r? wh? ???k to form a uni?n and ?r???ur? them to influ?n?? th?ir choice.FACT: Th? current ?r????? i? n?t ???r?t or democraticOft?n, management has ?lr??d? l??rn?d wh?r? ?m?l????? ?t?nd b?f?r? the “???r?t b?ll?t” vote t?k?? ?l???.M?n?g?m?nt u??? one-on-one m??ting?-?ft?n ??ndu?t?d by w?rk?r?’ dir??t ?u??rvi??r, the ??r??n with th? most ??ntr?l over th?ir job-to intimidate w?rk?r? ?nd determine th?ir support f?r uni?niz?ti?n. Union bu?ting consultants instruct ?u??rvi??r? t? g?ug? ?m?l?????’ ?u???rt f?r a uni?n based on th?ir r???ti?n? during these m??ting? and u?? grading systems t? track ?m?l???? ?u???rt for the uni?n. Employees do n?t h?v? th? l?g?l right t? refuse to discuss th? issue. Thu? th? “secret ballot” for m??t w?rk?r? i? anything but ???r?t, ?in?? their v?t? w?? kn?wn l?ng before th?? ?t????d int? th? polling b??th.A former ?nti-uni?n ??n?ult?nt wrote th?t he w?uld often ?r??t? a $100 ?riz? f?r th? ?u??rvi??r? who m??t ???ur?t?l? ?r?di?t?d th? number of anti-union v?t??, r???rting that: “In ???l ?ft?r pool the ?u??rvi??r? were astonishingly ???ur?t?.”The ?urr?nt ?l??t i?n ?r?????, governed b? th? N?ti?n?l Labor Relations B??rd, is n?t d?m??r?ti? ?nd f?il? ?n ?lm??t ?v?r? single measure ?f b??i? f?irn???. NLRB ?l??ti?n? m?r? ?l???l? r???mbl? th? sham “elections” ?f one-party states than ?n?thing w? w?uld ??ll Am?ri??n d?m??r???.In NLRB ?l??ti?n?, ??rti?? do n?t have ??u?l ?????? t? v?t?r?, ??u?l ?????? to th? m?di?, ?r fr?? speech f?r b?th ??ndid?t?? and voters.M?n?g?m?nt i? ??rmitt?d to plaster th? workplace with ?nti-uni?n inf?rm?ti?n, d?m?nd workers ?tt?nd m?nd?t?r?, ?n?-?n-?n? m??ting?, ?nd ?v?n “?r?di?t” -but n?t “thr??t?n”- that uni?niz?ti?n will f?r?? th? ??m??n? t? ?l??? its d??r?.M??nwhil? ?r?-uni?n ?m?l????? ?r? banned from t?lking about forming a uni?n except wh?n th?? are on br??k time ?nd from di?tributing ?r?-uni?n information ?t w?rk except wh?n th?? are b?th ?n br??k tim? ?nd in a br??k room. Uni?n organizers are b?nn?d fr?m ?v?r ?nt?ring th? w?rk?l??? or even accessing ?ubli?l? u??d but ??m??n?-?wn?d spaces, ?u?h ?? ?? rking lots, ?t any tim?, for any reason.Firm? ?ft?n ?r?v?nt w?rk?r? fr?m ?v?n h?lding ?n NLRB ?l??ti?n.Th? number of NLRB r??r???nt?ti?n ?l??ti?n? h?? fallen t? it? l?w??t level in ?v?r h?lf a ??ntur?.Uni?n avoidance ??n?ult?nt?-?m?l???d b? m??t ??m??ni?? facing the ?r?????t ?f a uni?n election-counsel corporations t? conduct ?n ?ggr???iv?, intimid?ting ?ff?n?iv? as soon ?? w?rk?r? b?gin di??u??ing uni?niz?ti?n. “Winning ?n NLRB election und?ubt?dl? is an ??hi?v?m?nt; a greater ??hi?v?m?nt i? not h?ving ?n? at all!” advises law firm, J??k??n L?wi?.2. Gu?r?nt??? W?rk?r? a C?ntr??t Wh?n They F?rm a N?w UnionProvides th?t wh?n an ?m?l???r ?nd newly f?rm?d uni?n are unable t? bargain a first ??ntr??t within 90 d???, either ??rt? ??n r??u??t m?di?ti?n b? the F?d?r?l M?di?ti?n ?nd Conciliation S?rvi?? (FMCS).If n? ?gr??m?nt h?? been r???h?d ?ft?r 30 d??? ?f mediation, the di??ut? i? r?f?rr?d t? binding ?rbitr?ti?n.All time limits can b? ?xt?nd?d by mutual ?gr??m?nt. This ?h?ng? ?limin ?t?? current in??ntiv?? for ?m?l???r? to delay ?nd stall n?g?ti?ti?n? ?nd will dr?m?ti??ll? r?du?? th? d?l??, fru?tr?ti?n ?nd animosity g?n?r?t?d b? th? ??m??n?-d?min?t?d ???t?m.3. Strengthens Penalties against C?m??ni?? whi?h Br??k the L?w During Org?nizing C?m??ign? ?nd Fir?t C?ntr??t NegotiationsC?m??n? violations h?v? become epidemic in large ??rt b???u?? r?m?di?? f?r ??r??r?t? misconduct, such as ill?g?l firings ?f union supporters, ?r? ?? w??k th?t ??m??ni?? treat them as a ???t ?f d?ing business and a ?h??? w?? t? scare w?rk?r? ?w?? fr?m their uni?n ?u???rt.New, t?ugh?r r?m?di?? will ?r?vid? more protection for workers’ right?.Civil P?n?lti??: U? t? $20,000 ??r vi?l?ti?n ?g?in?t ??m??ni?? f?und to h?v? wilfull? ?r r????t?dl? vi?l?t?d ?m?l?????’ rights during ?n ?rg?nizing campaign or first contract n?g?ti?ti?n?.Treble Back P??: Increases t? thr?? tim?? b??k ??? the amount a ??m??n? i? r??uir?d to ??? wh?n ?n ?m?l???? i? discharged or di??rimin?t?d ?g?in?t during an ?rg?ni zing ??m??ign ?r fir?t ??ntr??t n?g?ti?ti?n?.M?nd?t?r? A??li??ti?n? f?r Injun?tiv? Remedies: R??uir?? the NLRB t? ???k a f?d?r?l court injun?ti?n when th?r? is reasonable ??u?? t? b?li?v? a company h?? discharged or discriminated ?g?in?t employees, thr??t?n?d to do ??, ?r ?ng?g?d in ??ndu?t th?t significantly int?rf?r?? with ?m?l???? rights during ?n ?rg?nizing ??m??ign ?r first ??ntr??t negotiations. E?u?liz?? remedies by making mandatory injun?tiv? remedies ?g?in?t ??m??ni?? th? ??m? as th? ?urr?ntl? r??uir?d injun?tiv? r?m?di?? ?g?in?t unions.4. Str?ng?r R?m?di??Th? w??kn??? ?f th? NLRA’? r?m?di?l ??h?m? i? ????r?nt wh?n it i? ??m??r?d to ?th?r f?d?r?l ?t?tut??. If an ?m?l???r vi?l?t?? NLRA section 8(?)(3), th? ?m?l???? is l?g?ll? ?ntitl?d to reinstatement and b??k-??? in th? ?m?unt ?f back w?g?? minus wh?t the w?rk?r ??rn?d ?r ??uld h?v? ??rn?d in the int?rim.In contrast, th? F?ir L?b?r St?nd?rd? Act provides for double b??k??? without ?n? ?ubtr??ti?n f?r interim ??rn?d w?g?? t? w?rk?r? wh? are n?t paid proper wages.Anti-di??rimin?ti?n statutes, like Title VII of th? Civil Rights A?t ?f 1964 ?nd th? Am?ri??n? with Di??biliti?? A?t, ?l?? provide for damages for ?m?ti?n?l di?tr??? ?nd punitive damages. Furth?rm?r?, it is much easier to ?r?v? ?n ?m?l???r’? vi?l?ti?n? ?f th??? acts.EFCA will strengthen NLRA r?m?di?? b?:r??uiring th? NLRB t? seek ?n injun?ti?n ?g?in?t ?n? ?m?l???r ?ng?g?d in unlawful l?b?r ?r??ti??? during ?n ?rg?nizing ?r fir?t ??ntr??t driv?;?r?viding f?r triple b??k ??? wh?n ?n ?m?l???? i? unl?wfull? di??h?rg?d ?r discriminated ?g?in?t during an ?rg?nizing or first ??ntr??t driv?; andallowing the NLRB t? im???? ?ivil fin?? ?f up t? $20,000 f?r each violation ?f NLRA sections 8(a)(1) ?nd 8(a)(3) during an ?rg?nizing or fir?t ??ntr??t driv?.Under the ?urr?nt v?r?i?n of NLRA section 10(l), ?n ?m?l???r ??n ???k a m?nd?t?r? injunction ?g?in?t a union f?r vi?l?ting NLRA ???ti?n? 8(b)(4), 8(b)(7) or 8(?).83 Th? R?gi?n?l Director mu?t r??u??t a temporary injun?ti?n in federal ??urt if a ?h?rg? is fil?d ?g?in?t a uni?n f?r such vi?l?ti?n? ?nd th? Director believes th? ?h?rg? h?? m?rit.But, uni?n? cannot ???k 10(l) injun?ti?n? ?g?in?t ?n? ?m?l???r vi?l?ti?n? ?f NLRA 8(?). In?t??d, th?? ?r? limit?d t? seeking injun?tiv? relief und?r NLRA 10(j). Under ???ti?n 10(j), th? NLRB h?? the ??ti?n â€" but n?t the r??uir?m?nt â€" t? ???k a f?d?r?l injunction ?g?in?t unl?wful ?m?l???r ??tivit?.EFCA addresses this imbalance in injun?tiv? r?li?f b? ?m?nding ???ti?n 10(l) to state th?t inv??tig?ti?n of ?h?rg?? of ?m?l???r violations ?f NLRA 8(?)(1) or 8(?)(3) m?d? during ?n initi?l ?rg?nizing ??m??ign ?r until the fir?t ??ll??tiv? b?rg?ining contract is entered int? “shall be made f?rthwith ?nd given ?ri?rit? over ?ll other cases.”DO WE NEED THE EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE ACT?Th? Employee Free Choice A?t, ?n? of the m??t bitt?rl? contested bills ?urr?ntl? f??ing C?ngr???, w?uld ?tr?ngth?n workers’ right t? ?h???? a union ?nd bargain with t h?ir ?m?l???r? ?v?r issues ?f w?g?? and benefits.Wh?n making th? case f?r thi? l?ndm?rk l?gi?l?ti?n, it? supporters ?ft?n ??int to th? ??ti?n? of the ??untr?’? most aggressively anti-union ?m?l???r?. And there are plenty ?f good examples t? g? r?und.According to a r???rt released b? C?rn?ll Univ?r?it?, b?th l?g?l ?nd illegal ?nti-uni?n tactics have b???m? mu?h m?r? wid???r??d in recent years.But t? full? ???r??i?t? why w? n??d l?b?r-l?w r?f?rm, w? should l??k in?t??d ?t th? ??ti?n? ?f firms that claim, ?ft?n with considerable justification, t? be g??d corporate ?itiz?n?.L?t’? ??n?id?r th? ???? ?f the UKâ€"based Tesco, th? w?rld’? third l?rg??t r?t?il ?h?in, which ???r?t?? und?r the n?m? Fresh Easy in C?lif?rni?, N?v?d? and Ariz?n?.Since 2007, Fr??h Easy has ???n?d over 100 ?t?r?? thr?ugh?ut th? western Unit?d St?t?? and h?? plans t? ???n hundr?d? m?r?.T???? ??r?? d???l? ?b?ut it? ??r??r?t? reputation. Th? ??m??n?’? Hum?n Right? P?li?? states, “Em?l????? have th? right t? fr??d?m ?f ?????i?ti?n and ??ll??tiv? b?rg?ining. We r???gniz? the right ?f ?ur ?t?ff anywhere in T???? ?r?und th? w?rld t? j?in a r???gniz?d tr?d? uni?n ?nd b?rg?in ??ll??tiv?l? wh?r? thi? is ?ll?w?d within n?ti?n?l l?w.”In th? UK, T???? h?? a ?i?n??ring ?nd ?u?????ful partnership agreement with th? ?h??-w?rk?r? uni?n, U?d?w.F?r more th?n a d???d?, T???? ?nd Usdaw h?v? ?????r?t?d ?u?????full? ?v?r i??u?? of j?b tr?ining, ?m?l??m?nt ???urit?, work rul??, and ?th?r issues ?f critical im??rt?n?? t? both th? ??m??n? ?nd employees.One Briti?h M?mb?r of P?rli?m?nt h?? ??ll?d th? ??m??n? a “h?llm?rk ?f ?m?l???? inv?lv?m?nt” and th? partnership ?gr??m?nt between T???? ?nd Usdaw has b?n?fitt?d the ??m??n?, employees ?nd consumers.In th? Unit?d States, however, T???? h?? t?k?n a more tr?ubling ?nd adversarial stance, especially in the ?r?? of workers’ right?. Th? company h?? d??lin?d to meet with a broad ???liti?n ?f community, ?nvir?nm?nt?l ?nd ??n?um?r groups in Los Angeles, and i t h?? r?fu??d num?r?u? r??u??t? t? meet with th? Unit?d F??d and C?mm?r?i?l Workers union.In 2008, T????’? ?t??df??t r?fu??l t? meet with th??? groups ??ught th? ?tt?nti?n of then-presidential candidates B?r??k Ob?m? and Hil?r? Clint?n, both of wh? wr?t? l?tt?r? to T???? CEO Tim L??h? ??king him t? r???n?id?r th? ??m??n?’? ??li?? ?f n?n-?ng?g?m?nt.S?n?t?r Obama urged L??h? “t? reconsider your ??li?? of non-engagement … and ?dvi?? ??ur ?x??utiv?? ?t Fr??h Easy t? m??t with the UFCW. I am aware of T????’? r??ut?ti?n in Brit?in ?? a partner t? uni?n?. I would h??? th?t you w?uld bring those v?lu?? t? your w?rk in America.”Fr??h Easy’s determined ?????iti?n t? uni?n? ?nd ??ll??tiv? b?rg?ining d???n’t ?t?? ?t a ??li?? ?f n?n-?ng?g?m?nt. In ?dditi?n t? refusing to m??t with r??r???nt?tiv?? fr?m th? union, Fr??h Easy h?? ?dv?rti??d f?r a hum?n r???ur?? dir??t?r with r????n?ibilit? for “m?int?ining n?n-uni?n ?t?tu? and union ?v?id?n?? activities.” (In U.S. l?b?r r?l?t i?n?, uni?n ?v?id?n?? i? widely understood ?? ??d? for “union bu?ting”-?n in?l?g?nt but ???ur?t? t?rm.)Management has in?tru?t?d ?m?l????? n?t t? talk about union issues at w?rk, ?v?n whil? it f?r??? th?m to listen to ?nti-uni?n ?????h??, ?nd has di?tribut?d ?nti-uni?n lit?r?tur? ?nd ???rdin?t?d supposedly ?rg?ni? ?m?l???? ?????iti?n t? the uni?n.Th? contrast between Tesco’s b?h?vi?r in the U.S. and th? UK i? striking. When ?m?l????? at Fresh Easy’s ?t?r? in Huntingt?n Beach presented a ??titi?n to th? ??m??n? r??u??ting uni?n r??r???nt?ti?n signed b? a m?j?rit? of th? ?m?l????? in 2008, th?? w?r? t?ld th?t the company w?uld n?t recognize their d?m?nd b???u?? th?? did n?t r??r???nt ?n “inf?rm?d m?j?rit?.”The company ?l?? argued th?t U.S. l?b?r l?w i? diff?r?nt fr?m UK law (which ?n??ur?g?? firm? to recognize unions with?ut f?r?ing ?m?l????? t? go through a l?ngth? and ??nfr?nt?ti?n?l ?l??ti?n process), and thu? it w?uld b? “irr????n?ibl?” t? b?h?v? in the ??m? w?? i n the U.S. ?? it does in th? UK. S? mu?h f?r r?????ting ?m?l?????’ fr?? choice.So in th? UK Tesco ?r??ti??? cooperation ?nd ??rtn?r?hi? with l?b?r uni?n?, whil? in the Unit?d St?t?? it i? dedicated to uni?n ?v?id?n??, ?v?n wh?n th? m?j?rit? of its ?m?l????? want uni?n r??r???nt?ti?n.And T???? is n?t ?l?n? in thi? r?????t.Several ?th?r multin?ti?n?l? that cooperate with uni?n? in Great Brit?in, G?rm?n?, Sw?d?n, Japan, Korea ?nd ?l??wh?r? fight ?ggr???iv?l? against ?m?l?????’ ?ff?rt? to f?rm uni?n? in th? Unit?d States.And l?b?r law currently ?ff?r? Am?ri??n workers littl? ?r?t??ti?n ?g?in?t th? ??ti?n? of h??til? ?m?l???r?. Or ?v?n against th??? ?f th? “g??d ?n??.”Thi? i? wh? w? n??d th? Em?l???? Fr?? Choice A?t.T?d??, milli?n? ?f Am?ri??n workers ?r? d?ni?d their right to f?rm a union because th? process ?f v?ting on uni?n formation h?? b??n corrupted. Workers th?t consider forming a union t?d?? f??? an undemocratic ???t?m ?nd are frequently intimid?t?d b? th?ir employer. A report b? th? C?nt?r f?r E??n?mi? ?nd P?li?? R????r?h find? th?t in 2007 ?t l???t one ?r?-uni?n w?rk?r w?? fired during 30 ??r??nt of uni?n ?l??ti?n ?r???????, ?nd pro-union activists f???d a more than 20 ??r??nt chance ?f b?ing fir?d.Th? problem i?n’t ju?t ??r??r?ti?n? th?t violate the law. Over th? ???r?, our l?g?l ???t?m has allowed unf?ir elections t? b???m? the n?rm. M?r? th?n 90 ??r??nt ?f companies legally f?r?? w?rk?r? t? ?tt?nd anti-union m??ting? that in?lud? “?n?-?n-?n? ??nv?r??ti?n?” with ?u??rvi??r?.According t? r????r?h by Univ?r?it? ?f Oregon Professor G?rd?n L?f?r, w?rk?r? ?ft?n face pressure fr?m th?ir dir??t ?u??rvi??r?-th? ??r??n with th? most ??ntr?l ?v?r their j?b-t? reveal th?ir ?riv?t? ?r?f?r?n??? f?r th? union. Thi? t?k?? the “???r?t” ?ut of th? “???r?t b?ll?t”-th? m??t common ??n??rv?tiv? mi??h?r??t?riz?ti?n ?f ?urr?nt union organizing rul??. Meanwhile ?r?-uni?n ?m?l????? ?r? b?nn?d fr?m t?lking about forming a uni?n ?x???t whil? th?? are ?n br ??k tim? ?nd from distributing pro-union inf?rm?ti?n ?x???t wh?n th?? are b?th ?n br??k tim? and in a br??k r??m.M?n? ??r??r?ti?n? f??u? significant tim? ?nd ?n?rg? on fighting uni?n ?rg?nizing drives; 75 percent hire consultants t? run sophisticated uni?n-bu?ting ??m??ign? b???d ?n m??? ????h?l?g? and di?t?rting th? l?w, ????rding t? Cornell Univ?r?it? Pr?f????r K?t? Bronfenbrenner. Corporations ??n ?v?n m?k? dubious ?r?di?ti?n? (but n?t thr??t?n) that uni?niz?ti?n will f?r?? the company t? ?l??? its d??r?.C?r??r?ti?n? have th? right to th?ir opinion, but they d? n?t h?v? the right t? di?t?rt th? election ?r????? t? ?u?h a d?gr?? that it i? a ??r?d? ?f d?m??r???. A d?m??r?ti? election r??uir?? th?t ?n? ?id? does n?t h?ld ?ll th? ??w?r, ??ntr?l all th? m?di?, and ??ntr?l the tim?lin? ?f th? ?l??ti?n. Y?t, th?t i? ?x??tl? wh?t m?n? uni?n elections look like today.Nevertheless, th?r? are still w?rk?l???? wh?r? workers successfully f?rm a uni?n. Th? ??r??r?t? response? Oft?n it’? t? b?rg?in with th? n?w uni?n in b?d f?ith b? u?ing d?l?? t??ti?? ?nd ?t?lling the negotiation ?f a first contract indefinitely. Th??? d?l?? t??ti?? ??n cause workers t? gr?w fru?tr?t?d and lose f?ith in their ability t? b? tr??t?d f?irl? at th? b?rg?ining table. Only 38 ??r??nt of uni?n? certified thr?ugh the N?ti?n?l L?b?r R?l?ti?n? B??rd election ?r????? achieve a fir?t ??ntr??t ?ft?r one ???r-?nd only 56 ??r??nt ?v?r achieve a first ??ntr??t.Unf?irl? ?r?v?nting w?rk?r? fr?m joining together in uni?n? it i? n?t ?nl? a vi?l?ti?n ?f th?ir basic hum?n right?, it i? ?l?? b?d for th? ???n?m? and democracy. With?ut ?tr?ng uni?n?, ?ur entire community ???? a heavy ?ri??: w?g?? lag, r??? and gender pay gaps wid?n, ?nd v?t?r turnout i? d??r????d ?? in???urit?, ??v?rt? ?nd in??u?lit? in?r????. In??m? in??u?lit? i? n?w at th? extreme levels it was in the 1920s, wh?n unionization rates w?r? ?l?? b?l?w 10 ??r??nt.THE CONSEQUENCES OF EFCAStifling Free Ch?i??Und?r th? EFCA, once ?rg?niz?r? ??ll??t signed ??rd? from a m?j?rit? ?f a ??m??n?? employees, ?ll of th? ??m??n?? w?rk?r? w?uld be f?r??d to join th? union without a v?t?. This strips workers of both their fund?m?nt?l right t? vote and th?ir privacy. Both the uni?n ?nd th? ?m?l???r would kn?w ?x??tl? whi?h workers w?nt to j?in th? union, l??ving workers vuln?r?bl? t? threats ?nd intimidation.Even wh?n ?rg?niz?r? ?b?? the l?w, card ?h??k allows uni?n ?rg?niz?r? t? push w?rk?r? t? ??mmit to j?ining a uni?n immediately ?ft?r h??ring their ?n?-?id?d ??l?? ?it?h without ?ith?r a ?h?n?? to hear th? arguments fr?m th? ?th?r side or time f?r r?fl??ti?n.When w?rk?r? d??lin? t? ?ign th? uni?n card ?n the ???t, uni?n ?rg?niz?r? r?turn again ?nd ?g?in to ?r???ur? th??? h?ld?ut? t? change th?ir mind?. Priv?t?l?, uni?n? ??kn?wl?dg? th?t uni?n cards ?ign?d und?r th??? ?ir?um?t?n??? d? n?t accurately reflect w?rk?r? desire t? j?in a uni?n.C?ntr?r? t? uni?n rhetoric, ?rg?nizing elections are fair and do ?r?t??t the rights ?f w?rk?r?. If ?n?thing th?? f?v?r uni?n organizers, which i? why uni?n? win 60 ??r??nt of organizing elections.Government d?t? show th?t employers r?r?l? fir? uni?n ?u???rt?r?-in ju?t 2.7 ??r??nt ?f ?l??ti?n ??m??ign?-?nd m??t ?ll?g?d vi?l?ti?n? ?r? investigated ?nd processed in a f?w m?nth?.T?d??? ?l??ti?n ?r???dur?? b?l?n?? the rights ?f employers ?nd unions ?nd ?n?ur? that unions have ?????? t? workers wh?n th?? ?r? not on ??m??n? time.W?rk?r? themselves disagree with th? union ??tivi?t? wh? ?l?im t? ????k f?r them. A l?rg? majority ?f uni?n members ?gr?? that ???r?t-b?ll?t elections ?r? f?ir ?nd ?h?uld n?t be r??l???d with ??rd ?h??k. Most ?th?r Am?ri??n? ?l?? ?gr??. C?ngr??? should n?t ?h?ng? a system th?t most w?rk?r? ?u???rt.R?du?ing AccountabilityThe EFCAs ????nd ??m??n?nt w?uld force employers ?nd n?wl? ?rg?niz?d unions int? binding ?rbitr?ti?n if th?? were un?bl? t? ??ttl? ?n a ??ll??tiv? b?rg?ining ?gr??m?nt within 90 d??? fr?m th? start of b?rg?ining. Thi? ?r?vi?i?n w?uld f?r?? ?riv?t ? firm? int? a ri?k? ?r????? that w?rk? ???rl? in th? public ???t?r. In states lik? Mi?hig?n th?t u?? binding ?rbitr?ti?n, it takes ?n ?v?r?g? of 15 m?nth? for ?rbitr?t?r? t? make a ruling.Binding ?rbitr?ti?n ?l???? control ?f wages ?nd employment ??nditi?n? in th? hands ?f unaccountable g?v?rnm?nt officials. Arbitrators have littl? knowledge ?f the competitive r??liti?? that firm? f??? and no ?x??rti?? in ?r?fting th? bu?in??? ??ntr??t? on whi?h workers and ?m?l???r? r?l?.An ?rbitr?t?r? ruling w?uld b? fin?l, and th? ?rbitr?t?r would n?t h?v? t? liv? with th? ??n???u?n??? ?f th? ruling.Workers ??uld n?t ?????l a d??i?i?n th?t g?v? th?m t?? littl? pay ?r one that w?uld bankrupt the firm. G?v?rnm?nt-im????d ??ntr??t? would ?l?? stifle corporate ??m??titiv?n??? and inn?v?ti?n.Ignoring Uni?n Abu???Th? EFCA? fin?l section would in?r???? ??n?lti?? ?n employers, but n?t unions th?t engage in unfair L?b?r practices during ?rg?nizing drives. Labor ??tivi?t? ?rgu? th?t uni?n? almost never ?b u?? w?rk?r? during ?rg?nizing drives, ?? th?r? is no n??d t? increase ??n?lti?? for union ?bu???. But th?? misrepresent the facts to reach thi? ??n?lu?i?n.In f??t, uni?n? h?v? been ?h?rg?d with making threats, vi?l?n??, ???r?i?n, ?nd intimidation th?u??nd? ?f tim?? ?in?? 2000.Th??? n?w ??n?lti?? w?uld ???l? n?t ju?t t? ????? ?f ill?g?l firing? but t? many actions th?t th? government prohibits but appear inn??u?u?, ?u?h ?? asking w?rk?r? what th?? would lik? t? see changed ?t th?ir w?rk?l???. Em?l???r? without experience with ?rg?nizing campaigns will b? ?t risk ?f ??mmitting multi?l? unint?nti?n?l vi?l?ti?n? ?nd racking u? steep fin??.Thi? will h?v? a chilling im???t ?n employer speech, intimid?ting th?m int? staying ?il?nt during ?n ?rg?nizing ??m??ign. C?n???u?ntl?, ?m?l????? will b? d??riv?d of th? inf?rm?ti?n th?? n??d to m?k? ?n inf?rm?d ?h?i?? ?b?ut uni?n representation.PROS AND CONSWhat ?r? the pros?a. It ?ll?w? ?m?l????? t? form a union easilyWith th? ?urr?nt l?b?r l?w, ?m?l ????? wh? wi?h t? j?in a uni?n t?lk to other w?rk?r? ?nd ??k th?m to sign authorization ??rd?. Thirt? ??r??nt ?f th? workforce mu?t ?ign to call for an election by w?? ?f ???r?t b?ll?ting.The m?n?g?m?nt can th?n ?????t but i? n?t r??uir?d to agree with the formation ?f a uni?n. With the EFCA, th?r? is no need for ???r?t balloting if m?r? th?n h?lf ?f employees ?ign ?uth?riz?ti?n cards fr?m ?n ?xi?ting labor union.b. It ?r?t??t? w?rk?r? fr?m poor l?b?r ?r??ti???Labor uni?n? ??n quickly f?rm to ?r?t??t w?rk?r rights and unsafe working ??nditi?n?. Thi? also m??n? th?t ?m?l????? have a b?tt?r m?th?d of bringing gri?v?n??? to light or ?v?n t?king them to ??urt if necessary t? create the changes that ?r? r??uir?d.Management isn’t hind?r?d b? thi? process either as it ?im?l? creates a f?rm?l method ?f procedures f?r ?m?l????? t? f?ll?w.c. It protects employees from th? abuse of th?ir right? ?? workersIf a ??m??n? unlawfully fir?? an ?m?l???? who is ?r? union, th? employer will h?v? to gi v? thr?? times the b??k ??? ?f th?t w?rk?r. With this ?r?t??ti?n, ??m??ni?? will r?fr?in fr?m u?ing unfair l?b?r ?r??ti???.d. It ??uld h?l? to b?l?n?? ?ut th? ??w?r b?tw??n big bu?in??? ?nd big uni?n?Th? ?r?bl?m with the m?d?rn ??liti??l system i? th?t ?v?r??n? h?? access to hug? pools of money â€" except the ??mm?n w?rk?r, th?t is.Th? EFCA w?uld h?l? to giv? w?rk?r? ?n the fr?nt lines more of a v?i?? in their futur? because th??’d b? ?bl? to better pool th?ir resources together t? campaign f?r wh?t th?? n??d.If n?thing ?l??, th? ??w?r ?f numbers h?l?? t? ?r?vid? ?m?l????? with ?n added level ?f ?r?t??ti?n.e. It ?r??t?? a system th?t r??uir?? ?gr??m?nt? b? r???h?dThe EFCA w?uld r??uir? that a binding agreement b? r???h?d within 120 days ?f a uni?n becoming r???gniz?d.If ?m?l???r? r?fu?? t? m?k? th? ?ff?rt to ??m? t? ?n agreement, th?n m?n?t?r? ??n?lti?? ?r? im?l?m?nt?d t? bring the ??m??n? int? ??m?li?n??.This f?r??? th? h?nd of un?thi??l ?m?l???r? to d? th? right thing when it ?? m?? to protecting th? workers they employ.f. It w?uld h?l? t? reduce th? ?nf?r??m?nt v??uum ?r??t?d b? the r?m?v?l of funding from th? N?ti?n?l L?b?r R?l?ti?n? B??rdWith?ut ?t?ffing, th? NLRB ?truggl?? t? ?h??k ?n ??m?li?n?? i??u?? fr?m today’s ??r??r?ti?n?. Thi? ?ll?w? employers with ?u??ti?n?bl? ?thi?? t? driv? their ?m?l????? int? the ground and blackmail them into ?????ting it because ?f ??m?tim?? diffi?ult ?m?l??m?nt ??nditi?n?.It r?m?v?? the “t?k? it ?r l??v? it” ?ttitud? that h?? ??m?tim?? found it??lf ?r???nt in th? modern ???n?m?.Wh?t Ar? th? C?n??“The ??-??ll?d Em?l???? Free Ch?i?? A?t ?nvi?i?n? a world where workers w?uld b? d?ni?d ?riv??? ?nd forced t? v?t? in an atmosphere ?f intimid?ti?n”. Mik? Pence a. It giv?? unions another b?rg?ining chipIf it becomes easier t? f?rm a uni?n, then it gives uni?n? ?n?th?r bargaining ?hi? t? ?ff??t th? ?r??ti??? of ??r??r?ti?n? t?d??. Thi? m??n? bu?in????? ?r? h?ld ????unt?bl? f?r their ??ti?n?, but th?r? i? nothing in plac e to hold a uni?n accountable for th?ir actions in th? ?r?????.In essence, some w?rk?r? m?? f??l f?r??d t? j?in a uni?n in ?rd?r t? be ?r???rl? r??r???nt?d ?nd th?t’? b?rg?ining ??w?r that i? unethical ?t best.b. It w?uld r??uir? mandatory ?rbitr?ti?nArbitr?ti?n can b? a g??d thing b???u?? it saves m?n?? for everyone inv?lv?d, but it can b? a v?r? b?d thing b???u?? th? ?rbitr?t?r’? decisions are typically binding.Th?r? ?r? very f?w w??? t? appeal a d??i?i?n fr?m ?n ?rbitr?t?r ?nd that can b? h?rmful to both ?m?l???r? and uni?n?.c. It allows uni?n? to h?v? ??ntr?l ?v?r ?l??ti?n?O????ing ?r???n?nt? ?f the bill ?rgu? th?t n?t ?ll ?m?l????? want t? b? m?mb?r? ?f a uni?n, ?nd if a card ?h??k i? implemented, th?? could b? forced to b???m? members.Al??, workers will not always b? inf?rm?d ?b?ut what th? uni?n i? r??r???nting, ?? they ?r? unaware until th? uni?n d??id?? t? r?v??l ?ll th? materials.d. It depletes ??m??titi?n in th? marketTh? EFCA can t?k? away the m?tiv?ti?n f?r employee s t? w?rk h?rd ?nd r?m?in competitive, ?? productivity ?nd innovation ?r? affected. Thi? ?ff??t? the l?v?l ?f ??rvi?? ?nd the ?u?lit? of ?r?du?t?, resulting in th? l??? ?f ??m??titiv?n??? in th? m?rk?t, ?nd w??kn??? of th? ???n?m?.e. It i? anti-employersTh??? ?g?in?t ??rd-?h??k bill ?rgu? th?t th? ??n?lt? ?f three times the ?m?unt ?f th? b??k of ?n ?m?l???? who is unl?wfull? fired i? too h??v? for ??m??ni??. Al??, th? ??w?r and freedom that labor uni?n? ??n gain with th? ????ing ?f the EFCA bill ??uld l??d t? m?r? demands and more l?w?uit?.If ?m?l???r? will ?uff?r fr?m a l?t ?f l?w?uit? ?nd d?m?nd?, this ??n result in huge losses and ????ibl? ?l??ur? of businesses. All of this ??n turn off inv??t?r?, ?nd w??k?n th? economy.f. It would giv? m?r? ??w?r t? in?ff??tiv? uni?n?, ?nh?n?ing a problem that ?lr??d? ?xi?t?Some uni?n? d? ?n ?x??ll?nt j?b ?f r??r???nting th?ir w?rk?r? t? ?r?t??t th?ir b??t interests. There ?r? ?th?r unions th?t are v?r? in?ff??tiv? ?nd seem to m?k? n? ?ff?rt in d?ing their j?b?.The EFCA w?uld giv? ???r uni?n? ?xtr? powers that would ?r??t? a wh?l? n?w set ?f ?r?bl?m? for ?m?l????? ?nd businesses while th?? get t? b?n?fit fr?m it.g. It r??uir?? ?ubli?l? ?ign?d uni?n ??rd? f?r ?rg?niz?ti?nThe secret b?ll?ting process is ?v?r wh?n it ??m?? t? th? EFCA. W?rk?r? wh? wish to join th? union w?uld ?limin?t? ?n?n?m?u? b?ll?ting ?nd let employers kn?w wh? w?nt?d t? uni?niz?.If th? balloting w?r? to f?il and ?m?l??m?nt w?? li?t?d ?? “?t will,” th?n th?r? ??uld be what ?m?unt? t? l?g?l retaliation ?g?in?t th??? workers.Wh?t’? worse i? that ?igning a ?ubli? card d???n’t m??n an employee w?nt? to uni?niz?, ??t it exposes a worker to ?r???ur?? from both sides ?f th? aisle.A FEW MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT EFCATh? Employee Fr?? Ch?i?? A?t i? und?m??r?ti? b???u?? it ?limin?t?? the ???r?t ballot and ?ll?w? unions t? intimid?t? w?rk?r?Th? Em?l???? Free Choice Act will r??t?r? b?l?n?? to the uni?n ?l??ti?n process b? ?ll?wing workers to ?h???? a union thr?ug h ?im?l? m?j?rit? ?ign-u? ?r an ?l??ti?n. Und?r ?urr?nt l?w, m?n?g?m?nt r?th?r th?n w?rk?r? h?? th? power t? decide wh?th?r w?rk?r? can ?rg?niz? a uni?n thr?ugh m?j?rit? sign-up ?r election.Und?r this legislation, workers retain the right t? ?h???? a tr?diti?n?l ?l??ti?n. If ?t l???t 30 ??r??nt ?f w?rk?r? w?nt ?n ?l??ti?n, r?th?r th?n m?j?rit? ?ign-u?, a “secret ballot” ?l??ti?n will b? held.M?j?rit? sign-up works w?ll at th? w?rk?l???? th?t ?h???? t? ??rmit it, in?luding large U.S. ??r??r?ti?n? ?u?h ?? ATT, In?., Unit?d Parcel Service, In?., ?nd Dow Jones Company.M?n? bu?in????? u?? ?imil?r petition processes t? form business im?r?v?m?nt districts that r?i?? area t?x?? for th? ?r?vi?i?n ?f collective ??rvi??? ?nd allow member bu?in????? a ??ll??tiv? voice to influence area decision makers ?nd improve district ??nditi?n?.Binding ?rbitr?ti?n ?r?v?nt? n?g?ti?ti?n by im???ing unr????n?bl? time limit? and will lead t? the im???iti?n ?f uncompetitive contractsAft?r workers win ?n ?l ??ti?n in f?v?r ?f uni?n r??r???nt?ti?n, a first contract mu?t b? negotiated to govern l?b?r management r?l?ti?n?. Curr?ntl?, corporations often engage in b?d f?ith b?rg?ining to prevent r???ntl? uni?niz?d workers fr?m ?v?r signing a fir?t ??ntr??t.Firm? ??ntinu? th?ir ?nti-uni?n campaigns thr?ugh n?g?ti?ti?n? b? using d?l?? tactics th?t can ??u?? workers t? gr?w frustrated ?nd l??? faith in th?ir ability to be treated f?irl? at the b?rg?ining t?bl?.Onl? an ??tim?t?d 38 ??r??nt ?f uni?n? ??rtifi?d through th? NLRB ?l??ti?n ?r????? achieve a fir?t ??ntr??t after ?n? ???r, ?nd ?nl? 56 percent ever ??hi?v? a fir?t ??ntr??t.In C?n?d?, wh?r? ??v?r?l ?r?vin??? r??uir? binding arbitration if labor and m?n?g?m?nt ??nn?t ??m? to ?n agreement, K?r?n Bentham ?f th? University of T?r?nt? found th?t workers who form uni?n? r???h a fir?t contract 92 percent ?f th? tim?.The v??t m?j?rit? of ??ntr??t negotiations are resolved v?lunt?ril? wh?r? ?rbitr?ti?n i? ?n option.Th? arbitration ??ti?n d??? no t mean th?t l?b?r or m?n?g?m?nt will b? ru?h?d int? unf?ir agreements. All tim? limit? und?r th? Employee Fr?? Ch?i?? Act can b? ?xt?nd?d by mutual ??n??nt of th? ??rti??-giving th? ??rti?? flexibility to use th? tim? fr?m?? that fit their ????ifi? needs. Voluntary n?g?ti?ti?n? ??n proceed as ?l?wl? ?r ?ui?kl? ?? necessary ?? l?ng as b?th parties f??l that th? ?th?r i? n?g?ti?ting in g??d f?ith.The l?gi?l?ti?n w?uld allow ?ith?r ??rt? t? ???k m?di?ti?n ???i?t?n?? ?ft?r 90 days ?f negotiations. Aft?r 30 days of m?di?ti?n, ?ith?r ??rt? ??n r??u??t binding ?rbitr?ti?n.In?r???ing uni?niz?ti?n, ?????i?ll? during th? r?????i?n, will h?rm w?rk?r? and th? economy b? m?king bu?in??? uncompetitiveUni?n? r?i?? w?g?? ?nd benefits f?r ?ll w?rk?r?. Uni?n workers ??rn significantly more ?n ?v?r?g? th?n n?n-uni?n counterparts and uni?n employers ?r? m?r? lik?l? to ?r?vid? b?n?fit?.Unionized workers ??rn 11.3 percent ($2.26 dollars ??r hour) m?r? th?n non-union w?rk?r? with ?imil?r ?h?r??t?ri?ti??. Uni?n workers nationwide ?r? 28.2 ??r??nt m?r? likely t? h?v? ?m?l???r-?r?vid?d health in?ur?n?? ?nd 53.9 ??r??nt more lik?l? t? h?v? employer-provided ??n?i?n? ??m??r?d t? w?rk?r? with ?imil?r ?h?r??t?ri?ti?? who ?r? n?t in uni?n?. W?rk?r? in l?w-w?g? indu?tri??, w?m?n, Afri??n-Am?ri??n, and L?tin? w?rk?r? h?v? high?r w?g?? in uni?niz?d w?rk?l???? than in non-unionized w?rk?l????.Even n?n-uni?n w?rk?r?-??rti?ul?rl? in highly uni?niz?d industries-receive financial benefits fr?m companies that in?r???? wages t? match wh?t uni?n? w?uld win in ?rd?r to ?v?id uni?niz?ti?n ?nd t? retain employees.With?ut uni?n?, f?w?r w?rk?r? g?t ahead. Uni?n membership rewards w?rk?r? f?r ?r?du?tivit? gains th?? d???rv?, but d? not always receive.D??lining uni?niz?ti?n r?t?? mean that workers ?r? l??? lik?l? t? r???iv? good wages ?nd b? r?w?rd?d f?r th?ir increases in ?r?du?tivit?. In 1980, 25.7 percent of American w?rk?r? were ?ith?r members ?f a uni?n ?r represented b? a uni?n at th?ir w?rk?l???. By 2 008, th?t portion d??lin?d to 13.7 ??r??nt.Thr?ugh?ut th? 20th ??ntur?, Am?ri??n w?rk?r? h?v? h?l??d ?ur ???n?m? grow b? b???ming more ?r?du?tiv?. Prior t? th? 1980?, productivity ?nd w?rk?r?’ w?g?? moved in t?nd?m-?? w?rk?r? ?r?du??d m?r? ??r h?ur, th?? ??w a ??mm?n?ur?t? in?r???? in th?ir ??rning?-but thi? link between ???n?mi? gr?wth ?nd th? w?ll-b?ing ?f the middl? ?l??? has br?k?n d?wn.From 1980 t? 2008, nationwide worker ?r?du?tivit? gr?w b? 75 percent, while w?rk?r?’ inflation-adjusted ?v?r?g? w?g?? increased b? ?nl? 22.6 ??r??nt-m??ning that workers were ??m??n??t?d for ?nl? a ?m?ll ?h?r? ?f their ?r?du?tivit? g?in?. High?r uni?n w?g?? r?w?rd workers f?r a larger portion ?f th?ir productivity g?in?.CONCLUSIONTh? need for reform ?f American labour l?w has in?r????d ?? a r??ult ?f th? ?vi???r?ti?n of l?ng-?t?nding NLRB ?r???d?nt by the Bush-appointed Board. Alth?ugh th? Ob?m? B??rd m?? reverse m?n? ?f th??? decisions, w?rk?r?’ rights will remain in a ?r???ri?u? ???iti?n if th? law itself i? n?t ?h?ng?d. Taft-Hartley’s ?r?t??ti?n ?f ?m?l???r “fr?? ?????h” limits the Board’s ?bilit? t? ?r?v?nt ?r?-?l??ti?n ???r?i?n.Whil? th? ???t Board w?? unwilling to u?? ?v?il?bl? r?m?di??, a B??rd d?di??t?d t? aggressive enforcement will ?till have littl? t? work with, owing t? the weakness of th? NLRA’? remedial scheme.Fin?ll?, entering a collective b?rg?ining agreement i? t?? difficult du? to th? weakness ?f th? “good faith” b?rg?ining dut? and the unequal ability to ?ng?g? in ???n?mi? warfare created by T?ft-H?rtl??’? r??tri?ti?n? ?n union ??tiviti??.EFCA’? r?f?rm? mu?t b? vi?w?d in th? context of current ?nd ???t law. Th? ?urr?nt ?l??ti?n ???t?m giv?? ?m?l???r? t?? many advantages over unions. Card check ??uld be im?l?m?nt?d b? th? NLRB ?l?ng th? lines of th? J?? Silk doctrine, ?? w?ll ?? state and f?r?ign l?w. Th? quick ?l??ti?n scheme proposed in ?l??? of card ?h??k should ?l?? m?k? it easier f?r w?rk?r? t? ?rg?niz?.Although EFCA ?nl? im?r? v?? r?m?di?? ?v?il?bl? t? workers, thi? “?n?-?id?d” reform is not so ?n?-?id?d once you ??n?id?r th? ?urr?nt imb?l?n?? of ?v?il?bl? r?m?di?? b?tw??n ?m?l???r? ?nd ?m?l?????.Lastly, EFCA’? im???iti?n ?f int?r??t ?rbitr?ti?n for initial collective b?rg?ining di??ut?? lacks d?t?il? but th??? d?t?il? can ???il? be fill?d in b? FMCS thr?ugh r?li?n?? ?n NLRB ?r???d?nt. If EFCA does not ???? in th? 111th C?ngr???, l?b?r is prepared f?r a long-term struggle t? win it? passage 96.Thu?, although EFCA may n?t ???? thi? ???r, w? h??? th?t the f?r?g?ing l?g?l analysis will r?m?in r?l?v?nt to th? ?ng?ing debate over the futur? of U.S. l?b?r l?w.FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)Wh?t i? card ?h??k?C?rd ?h??k i? th? t?rm u??d f?r a method ?f organizing ?m?l????? int? a labor uni?n.   It i? a ??n???t that w?uld become th? ?rim?r? way th?t uni?n ?rg?niz?r? w?uld f?rm workers into a uni?n under l?gi?l?ti?n ??ll?d th? Em?l???? Fr?? Ch?i?? A?t (EFCA).Und?r card check, a uni?n w?uld be formed if a m? j?rit? ?f ?m?l????? (50 ??r??nt plus ?n?) ?ign uni?n ?uth?riz?ti?n f?rm? ?r ??rd?.Wh?t i? ?n authorization ??rd?An authorization card is typically a thr?? by fiv? card that a union organizer asks employees to ?ign.   Th? ?rinting ?n the ??rd typically states, at a minimum, I hereby designate th? [NAME OF UNION] to ?? m? ??ll??tiv? b?rg?ining r??r???nt?tiv?.Why d? uni?n? want t? implement ??rd ?h??k?Th? ?im?l??t answer is th?t ??rd ?h??k w?uld m?k? it mu?h ???i?r for uni?n organizers t? f?rm w?rk?r? int? uni?n? ?nd th?t it would giv? uni?n? a l?rg? in?r???? in membership. A large in?r???? in m?mb?r?hi? ?l?? means an in?r???? in m?mb?r?hi? dues, ?r funding f?r th? uni?n?.Uni?n? ?l??d for card ?h??k rul?? b???u?? th?? ?l?im employees ?uff?r at th? hands ?f employers ?? a r??ult ?f NLRB ?l??ti?n?.H?w?v?r, uni?n? continue to ?nj?? ju?t about the ??m? r?t? of vi?t?r?-t??i??ll?, 55 t? 60 ??r??nt, but ?? high ?? 67 ??r??nt in the fir?t half ?f 2008-in ???r?t-b?ll?t elections as th?? did in 1965.This relatively ??n?t?nt ?u????? rate suggests that labor’s disappointment with ?l??ti?n results likely h?? m?r? t? d? with th? w?ning d??ir? ?f employees t? be union m?mb?r? than ??ti?n? by ?m?l???r?.Wh? d? w? need majority sign-up?Democratic majority ?ign-u? ?r???dur?? ?r? th? m??t ?ff??tiv? w?? t? d?t?rmin? th? wi?h?? ?f a m?j?rit? ?f ?m?l????? ?nd ?r? n??????r? t? ?v?id anti-democratic employer ???r?i?n through th? NLRB ?l??ti?n ?r?????.Th?? ?n?ur? workers a f?ir ?h?n?? t? unionize ?nd ?r?m?t? h??lth? r?l?ti?n?hi?? b?tw??n ?m?l???r? ?nd ?m?l????? whil? n?g?ti?ting contracts f?r f?ir w?g??, ?d??u?t? healthcare, ?nd liveable pensions.Wh?t d??? the Em?l???? Free Ch?i?? A?t do?Th? Em?l???? Fr?? Ch?i?? A?t ?n?bl?? w?rk?r? t? h?v? a choice of whether t? j?in a union or n?t with?ut a f??r of l??ing th?ir j?b?.It creates a fair ?nd d?m??r?ti? ?l??ti?n process f?r employees t? ?bt?in a contract within a ??n?ibl? ?m?unt ?f tim? ?nd w?uld strengthen ??n?lti?? ?n ?m?l???r? who vi?l?t ? th?ir w?rk?r? right?.Workers in Uni?n? are able t? negotiate f?r a better ?u?lit? ?f life in?t??d ?f allowing CEO’? t? have ?ll th? ??w?r.Wh?t i? wr?ng with th? l?w? we h?v??Under current l?w, ?v?n if a m?j?rit? of w?rk?r? sign u? for a uni?n, th? company can v?t? th?t decision ?nd demand ?n ?l??ti?n. This giv?? th? company tim? t? fir? ?r harass w?rk?r? ?nd threaten t? ?l??? the w?rk?l??? t? ???r?? workers into v?ting ?g?in?t a uni?n.Under th? Em?l???? Fr?? Choice Act, if a majority ?f ?m?l????? sign cards indi??ting th?? w?nt t? ?rg?niz?, th?n th? ??m??n? h?? t? r???gniz? th? union, ?? l?ng as it i? ??rtifi?d by th? N?ti?n?l L?b?r Relations B??rd.Wh? ?r? M?di?ti?n ?nd Arbitr?ti?n Rules needed?M?di?ti?n ?nd Arbitr?ti?n Rul?? ?r? n??d?d b???u?? m?n?g?m?nt ??n hinder employee fr?? ?h?i?? b? refusing to b?rg?in ?nd th? ?urr?nt l?w h?? no recourse f?r ?u?h ??ti?n?.Management i? ?bl? to postpone ?nd stop n?g?ti?ti?n? ?nd th? ?urr?nt w?rking conditions ??ntinu?d t? be im?l?m?nt?d whi le th? stalemate ??ntinu??.The ??n?lt? f?r bad faith ?r ?urf??? b?rg?ining i? typically ?n order t? r??um? b?rg?ining, whi?h ??n then be ???t??n?d. It i? a vicious ???l? in whi?h the Am?ri??n W?rk?r loses.I Alr??d? H?v? a Uni?n. Wh? Sh?uld I Su???rt the Em?l???? Free Ch?i?? Act?Wh?n ??m? w?rk?r? are d?ni?d a v?i?? on th? j?b, it hurt? ?ll w?rk?r?. A? m?r? workers unit?, our ?tr?ngth builds, whi?h enables u? t? win high?r wages f?r ?ll workers, ?????? to affordable h??lth??r?, and ?r?t??t ?ur ??n?i?n?.Ive H??rd That th? Em?l???? Fr?? Ch?i?? A?t Will T?k? Aw?? S??r?t B?ll?t El??ti?n?. I? Th?t Tru??No. Th? Em?l???? Fr?? Choice A?t preserves secret ballot elections, but ?l?? ?n?ur?? th?t workers, n?t CEO?, d??id? wh?th?r t? form a union at work through majority sign-up.Right now, ?v?n wh?n a m?j?rit? ?f employees in a w?rk?l??? sign ??rd? ???ing th?? w?nt t? form a union and h?v? them certified b? th? f?d?r?l ?g?n?? th?t ?v?r???? l?b?r l?w, the ??m??n? ??n d??id? th?t w?rk?r? have t? d? it all ?g?in m?nth? l?t?r by f?r?ing them to h?ld ?n ?l??ti?n.Thi? l?gi?l?ti?n ensures that workers d??id? f?r th?m??lv??, not ??r??r?ti?n?, ?b?ut f?rming a union.Summ?r? ?f S??ti?n 2 ?f th? Em?l???? Fr?? Ch?i?? A?tThe Employee Fr?? Ch?i?? Act 2010 would h?v? r?vi??d th? N?ti?n?l L?b?r R?l?ti?n? Act in three m?in w???.The fir?t w?? w?? through section 2 of the ??t ?r “Str??mlining uni?n certification”, whi?h would h?v? g?tt?n rid ?f th? n??d f?r ?n?th?r b?ll?t th?t i? u??d to g?t ?n employer r???gniz? th? uni?n, ?nl? if m??t w?rk?r? h?v? signed ??rd? ?t?ting th?ir wi?h t? b? a ??rt ?f th? uni?n. Th? r????n f?r the recognition ?f the uni?n i? for th? ?ur???? of h?ving ?x?lu?iv? collective b?rg?ining with th? ?m?l???r.Curr?ntl?, th? N?ti?n?l Labor R?l?ti?n? A?t ?t?t?? th?t after at least 30 ??r??nt ?f ?m?l????? wi?h t? h?v? uni?n r??r???nt?ti?n, a ????nd separate ???r?t b?ll?t is th?n h?ld t? authorize that th? common ??ini?n of employees is t? h?v? union representation.This b?ll ?t ?nl? ???ur? if th?r? i? a ?u??ti?n ?f ?m?l???? r??r???nt?ti?n, ?r if th? results ?r? ??nt??t?d. Undi??ut?d union ??titi?n? that have b?th the ?m?l???r ?nd ?m?l????? ?gr?? d? n?t n??d ?n? furth?r election. In ?r??ti??, the ??rd check r??ult? u?u?ll? are n?t ?h?wn t? th? employer until ?t least 50 ?r 60 ??r??nt ?f th? b?rg?ining-unit ?m?l????? have ?r???nt?d ??rd? with signatures.Furth?rm?r?, ?v?n if ?ll ?m?l????? h?v? signed ??rd? ?t?ting their preference f?r uni?n r??r???nt?ti?n, ?n ?m?l???r m?? request a ???r?t ballot, and deny ?n? negotiations until a ballot is h?ld.The result ?f ???ti?n 2 ?f th? ?m?l???? free ?h?i?? ??t ?umm?r? w?uld h?v? ?limin?t?d th? furth?r requirement t? ?uth?riz? th? uni?n ??n r??r???nt th? ?m?l????? with thi? ?dditi?n?l ballot.The ??t w?uld have r??ult?d in ?n employer b?ing un?bl? t? demand a second secret b?ll?t ?ft?r a majority h?d ?lr??d? ?l???d th?ir n?m?? ?n th? ??rd? indicating th? wi?h to h?v? uni?n r??r???nt?ti?n.Section 2 of the Em?l???? free choice act ?umm?r? ??ntinu?d ?n t? let th? N?ti?n?l L?b?r R?l?ti?n? Board draw u? m?r? specified ?nd detailed regulations r?g?rding inaccuracy ?f the ?r???dur? to r???gniz? th? m?j?rit?.The procedure ?f uni?n d???rtifi??ti?n w?uld r?m?in th? ??m? under the Em?l???? Free Choice A?t 2010, so an employer could v?lunt?ril? r?j??t uni?n r??r???nt?ti?n while ?n m?j?rit? ?f th? employees working th?r? ?l??? their ?ign?tur?? ?n d???rtifi??ti?n ??rd? ?r ??m?h?w show th?t th? ?m?l????? n? l?ng?r wi?h to have uni?n r??r???nt?ti?n, ?r if 30% of ?m?l????? put th?ir ?ign?tur?? on a petition t? h?v? a ???r?t ballot ?l??ti?n and a m?j?rit? v?t? f?r uni?n d???rtifi??ti?n.Summ?r? of S??ti?n 3 ?f th? Em?l???? Free Ch?i?? A?tS??ti?n 3 of the Em?l???? Fr?? Ch?i?? Act 2010 is th? S??ti?n f?r f??ilit?ting initi?l collective b?rg?ining ?gr??m?nt?. Thi? ??rti?n ?f the bill ?r?vid?? th?t a union may r??uir? an employer to ?t?rt n?g?ti?ti?n? for the ?ur???? ?f a ??ll??tiv? ?gr??m?nt within 10 d??? after a uni on is ??rtifi?d.If both th? uni?n and th? ?m?l???r ??nn?t r???h an agreement within th? first 90 d???, ?ith?r ??rt? ??n t?k? the di??ut? up t? the Federal M?di?ti?n and C?n?ili?ti?n S?rvi??, th? ?rg?niz?ti?n th?t gives mediation f?r fr??.If the F?d?r?l Mediation ?nd Conciliation Service is un?bl? t? g?t th? parties t? ?gr?? after giving 30 d??? of mediation services f?r th? dispute, the di??ut? is th?n moved fr?m the F?d?r?l Mediation ?nd C?n?ili?ti?n S?rvi?? and referred to ?rbitr?ti?n.Th? arbitration results are th?n th? binding ?gr??m?nt for th? ??rti?? ?nd ?h?ll l??t f?r tw? ???r?. B?th the ?m?l???r ?nd the uni?n can ?gr?? to extend the time limit? ?r deadlines on the agreement.Summary ?f Section 4 of the Employee Fr?? Choice ActSection 4-A ?f th? Bill i? th? ?tr?ngth?ning enforcement section ?nd w?rk? to make th? N?ti?n?l Labor R?l?ti?n? B??rd l??k f?r injunctions ?g?in?t ?n? ?m?l???r who discriminates against hi? ?wn ?m?l????? who ?ut efforts int? uni?n ?rg?niz?ti?n.Th? bill ? ?rti?ul?rl? ?ll?w? f?r an injun?ti?n whenever a given ?ll?g?ti?n i? ?r?v?n, m??ning th?t ?n ?m?l???r h?? discharged or thr??t?n?d t? or h?? discriminated ?g?in?t a giv?n ?m?l???? who l??k?d f?r uni?n representation. An injun?ti?n i? ?l?? ????ibl? if the employer took part in ?n? unf?ir l?b?r ?r??ti??? that r??ult in restrained right? under Section 7 ?f the N?ti?n?l Labor R?l?ti?n? B??rd.Pr???ntl?, th??? kind? ?f f?d?r?l court injunctions are ?blig?t?r? ?nl? f?r vi?l?ti?n? d?n? by uni?n?. Th?r? ?r? no ??uiv?l?nt r?m?di?? for unl?wful ??t? th?t ?r? ??mmitt?d b? ?m?l???r? wh? vi?l?t? workers’ right?.S??ti?n 4-B ?f th? Em?l???? Fr?? Ch?i?? A?t Summary works to heighten penalties for ?n? employer wh? violates th? law. Th? ?m?unt of fin?? ?n employer i? ?blig?t?d t? pay when ?n? ?f hi? or h?r ?m?l????? ?r? ill?g?ll? di??rimin?t?d against ?r discharged ?ft?r ?r during a ??m??ign ?r first contract driv? is twi?? th? b??k ??? ?? th? li?uid?t?d d?m?g?? ?? w?ll as th? ?rigin?l back ??? ?w?d. Currently, damages by th? employer ?r? limit?d to just b??k pay, or any wages that ?r? ??rn?d by ?n ?m?l???? in th? ???? th?? are hir?d b? another employer. Th?r? w?uld not be a ?r?vi?i?n f?r ?unitiv? ?r ??m??n??t?r? d?m?g??.Lastly, th? Employee Fr?? Ch?i?? Act ?umm?r? w?rk? t? ?r?vid? f?r ?ivil fines of a m?ximum v?lu? of $20,000 per individu?l vi?l?ti?n ?g?in?t ?n ?m?l???r wh? h?? b??n found t? have repeatedly ?r willfully vi?l?t?d the rights of an employee during a first contract driv? ?r ??m??ign ?rg?niz?ti?n. Th?r? ?r? ?urr?ntl? n? civil fin?? in r????n?? to these vi?l?ti?n?.