Employee Free Choice Act: Legislative Support in IL has Gained Ground while Misinformation Mounts

This post will do 3 things. First, it will demonstrate that the Employer Free Choice Act (EFCA) has become increasingly relevant among IL federal politicians in recent years. As such, and due to potential impact upon national, state, and local economies if EFCA was passed, it is worthwhile to explain what EFCA actually does. Finally, I address a propaganda campaign that has been waged by business since 2007, which is the year that EFCA began to pick up steam in the U.S. Senate.

On Tuesday night, 3,000 union members rallied at a Plumber’s Union Hall on Chicago’s West Side to voice their support for EFCA.



This rally was labor’s response to Sen. Roland Burris’s refusal to take a stance on EFCA. As the Tribune reported:

When he was a U.S. senator, Obama had been a sponsor of the proposal, called the Employee Free Choice Act.

Dennis Gannon, head of the Chicago Federation of Labor, said he was frustrated after a recent meeting with a Burris aide who indicated that Obama's replacement in the Senate has not yet decided where he stands on the issue.

"The junior senator from Illinois has puzzled all of labor," Gannon said Monday. "You would think he would be out in front, agreeing to be a co-sponsor and saying he’ll vote for it. It’s time for him to step to the plate and make a decision on the most important piece of legislation for labor in 40 years."

Gannon said he and national labor leaders will call on Burris to support the proposal, known as EFCA, at a rally today at the plumbers' union hall in Chicago.

Illinois Politicians Rep. Danny Davis and Ald. Ed Burke (14th) were two of the featured speakers at the rally on Tuesday. Here is a video of pro-EFCA comments made at the rally from Rep. Davis, IL SEIU State Council President Tom Balanoff, and Citizen Action/Illinois President William McNary.



Rep. Davis is only one of various IL Legislators that have been outspoken in their support for EFCA.


In 2007, Sen. Durbin gave a floor speech urging his colleagues to support EFCA, which failed to overcome a Republican filibuster.


Support for EFCA was one of Sen. Durbin’s 2008 campaign promises and he also pushed EFCA as a co-chair of President Obama’s Campaign. Here is Durbin Speaking at a 2008 EFCA rally in D.C.


Rep. Phil Hare is also a staunch supporter of EFCA and, as a former union member; Rep. Hare has devoted special attention to advancing EFCA. Here is Rep. Hare’s floor speech on the 2007 EFCA house bill.


The 2008 Democratic Convention in Colorado, Rep. Hare lobbied the entire IL delegation to support EFCA.


Tom Geoghegan, Congressional Candidate for the IL 5th district special election, even has a web ad in which he explains what EFCA entails and why he supports it.



Clearly, EFCA has found some allies among IL politicians, Roland Burris’s hold out notwithstanding.


I provide a summary of EFCA below for those interested.


The EFCA is an over hall of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (NLRA) and has 3 main parts.


1.) EFCA creates the Card Check Certification process which expands upon existing methods of union creation. Under NRLA, 30% of employees must sign cards indicating that they would like to join a union and once the required 30% of cards are signed the employer is forced to allow a vote to unionize the work force. Should a majority vote for the union, then a Union is formed that must be recognized by the employer. Under EFCA, all that is required is a majority of employee signatures on cards calling for the creation of a union. A simplistic definition would be a vote conducted via petition. Such a process simplifies and thus promotes the creation of unions.

2.) EFCA creates contract mediation and arbitration requirements. After the creation of a union, the employer has 90 day to negotiate and a contract. If unable to come to an agreement, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) will mediate negotiations for 30 days. If no contract exists after 120 days, the FMCS will appoint an arbitrator who will have sole authority to create a contract that will be binding for both parties for a 2 year period.

3.) EFCA significantly increases the employer penalties for violations of workers’ rights to form a union in 3 ways.

a.) EFCA triples the amount of individual penalties for firing a worker. So a worker who is found to have been illegally fired for union activities is entitles to 3 times back pay instead of just back pay.

b.) EFCA allows a civil action lawsuit of up to 20,000 for each violation of worker rights. Under the NRLA, no civil action was allowed

c.) EFCA mandates that the NRLA to seek an injunction against employers when there is reasonable cause to believe they have interfered with union organizing or first contract negotiation activities.

Essentially, the long and short of the EFCA is that Unions will be easier to create by simplifying the organization and formation process as well as reducing employers ability to undermine employee efforts to unionize through increased legal options and stepper punishments.

As you can imagine, EFCA faces strong opposition from U.S. employers. I briefly address this issue as a mere pundit.

While I am pro-union, I do not claim to have the right answer to labor issues and I certainly can understand and respect anti-union and anti-EFCA arguments based on economic profitability and long term competitiveness. Pro-union or not, I know BS when I see it and current opposition campaign to EFCA is so full of BS their eyes are brown.

I would have expected the argument advanced by those opposing EFCA to be similar to one put forth by Jerry Roper of the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce when he warns that the bill "will have a devastating effect and force countless businesses to close their doors, leading to substantial job loss."

I do not agree with this, but he at least makes a valid point.

Additionally, this video, though mostly an SEIU ad of talking points, does hold some footage of an anti-EFCA conference for CEOs. A consultant explains that the detrimental part of the EFCA legislation is that employers will lose control of their labor costs. Again that is a valid concern.



Instead of the truth, which is that the primary reason for opposition to the EFCA is economic concerns of business, the primary cause of opposition -as portrayed to the public- is a due to a concern for reduction of workers rights due to the loss of the private ballot.


Business interests form 501: C6 groups, which are non-profit issue advocacy groups with unlimited contribution limits and spending privileges.

Then use these groups to fund misleading advertisements like this one

The rational is that because card check certification is public, Union bosses will harass and pressure workers until they agree to accept a union. This might happen, however, it does not seem too probable. A would-be union boss does not have power to coerce fellow employees prior to the creation of a union and if he did have that power then he would likely already have much of the majority needed to start a union in the first place.

So while it is true that the private ballot is no longer in use, the rampant coercion on the part of co-workers seems unlikely. The same cannot be said about employer. After all, it is much easier to tell a co-worker to get lost then it is to tell that to your boss.

Union busting is a common practice among U.S. corporations. Some 82 percent of employers union-busting consultants, according to American Rights at Work. Such consulting firms aid companies in covertly undermining union creation through:

* Captive audience meetings. Management will hold captive audience meetings during work hours. They will have several unfounded reasons why they believe it is in the carrier's best interest to remain free from "outside interference".

* One-on-one meetings. Supervisors will hold one-on-one meetings with individual pilots and try to convince them that they need to remain union free.
Letters. The union buster will prepare anti-union letters for management to distribute at the bases and to send to pilot's homes.

* Anti-union committee. The union buster will help the carrier form an anti-union committee. They will provide the resources and make promises to those who join.

* Sudden changes. Management will suddenly be interested about the pilot's issues and concerns. They may implement phony committees and grant wage and/or benefit improvements.

Also, here are some supporting statics:

When employers are faced with organizing campaigns:

* 30 percent fire pro-union workers.

* 49 percent threaten to close a work site when workers try to form a union, but only 2 percent actually do.

* 51 percent coerce workers into opposing unions with bribery or favoritism.

* 91 percent force employees to attend one-on-one anti-union meetings with their supervisors.

There are tons of anecdotal examples as well.


Here is a press conference of a victimized worker


And here are some recent articles with personal horror stories in them.


http://www.suntimes.com/business/1436649,CST-NWS-labor18.article


http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/employee.free.choice.2.937266.html


If the above has not sold you, then take it from me. Employer abuse of workers’ rights to unionize is common in the U.S. I know from my summer experience as a truck unloader for Wal-Mart. Employees are forced to sign “contracts” saying that they are not interested in joining a union, but that is only after hours of videos that bash unions and a individual seat down with management where it is explained to the employee that unions will cost workers their jobs, maybe even the employee own job.

Opposition to EFCA is not a pro-labor position as it is portrayed by business interests. Whether you are pro-labor or pro-business is your prerogative, but the debate should be based on the merits of the bill and not on the fact that a lie repeated enough times will become credible to a certain percentage of the electorate.

Right now, this issue is relatively quiet. However, EFCA will come to the floor of the Senate sometime this year and when it does the EFCA debate will be in full swing, and though a national bill, its impacts will be felt at every level of government. Now you know what the debate entails and how it will be framed, which appears, I am said to say, to be more then can be said of Sen. Burris.