CDW PRESS RELEASE: CARD CHECK HYPOCRISY- SECRET BALLOTS OK FOR SENATORS BUT NOT FOR THEIR CONSTITUENTS

Senator Tom Harkin, lead sponsor of the mis-named Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) in the Senate, is no fan of card check, at least not for elections for Senate leaders. As reported in The Hill newspaper today, Harkin said:

“Every two years the caucus could have a secret ballot on whether a chairman should continue, yes or no.”

“We applaud Senator Harkin’s commitment to use secret ballots to elect for Senate leadership and committee chairs, but it makes us wonder why he supports a card check scheme instead of secret ballots for workers in union elections,” said Brian Worth, chairman of the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace.

Members of the House of Representatives are no strangers to card check hypocrisy. The same members of Congress, who have supported forcing card check on workers, enjoy secret ballots for electing House leadership. Here’s what House Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter had to say earlier this year about a difficult vote facing Democratic House members in the election between Reps Henry Waxman and John Dingell for chairmanship of the Energy and Commerce Committee:

“It’s a secret ballot. Thank the Lord.”

“American workers deserve the same privacy in union organizing elections that Congress gives itself in leadership elections. But if members of Congress, particularly those who are co-sponsors of EFCA, are so fond of card check, perhaps they should use it for their own leadership elections,” added Worth.

EFCA continues to face serious hurdles and bi-partisan opposition, as the controversial card check and binding interest arbitration provisions remain in the bill. Alternative proposals such as ambush elections and workplace access face similar skepticism because of their harmful impact on workers and small businesses. There is no difference between the anti-worker card check scheme and ambush elections which would penalize small businesses and workers. They both deny workers the opportunity to hear both sides of the debate before a secret ballot election is held. For small employers who are focused on running their businesses, ambush elections deny them the time to ensure that the process is fair. Along with that, allowing professional union organizers on the jobsite is equally as troubling. Current laws already allow employees who support the union to campaign on company property and for paid union organizers to contact workers outside the workplace, such as making visits to an employee’s home. Conversely, employers are not allowed to contact employees during non-work hours.

About the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace

The Coalition for a Democratic Workplace is made up of more than 580 associations and organizations from every state across the nation that have joined together to protect a worker’s right to a private ballot when deciding whether to join a union. In 2008, CDW embarked on a multi-million dollar public education campaign in key states that included polling, television, radio and internet ads and direct mail. For more information and a listing of our membership, please visit www.MyPrivateBallot.com.

CDW Press Release

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

EXPOSED: BIG LABOR’S STRATEGY FOR RAMMING THROUGH ANTI-WORKER CARD CHECK

Big Labor and their allies have concocted a plan for the mis-named and politically toxic Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) that would bypass the normal legislative procedures for ensuring a bill gets a fair hearing and reading. According to unnamed senior Democratic aides in today’s Roll Call, “Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is sketching a process for railroading the bill through the floor as quickly as possible to prevent Republicans from rallying a major campaign against it.”

To add insult to injury to the democratic process, a leadership aide was quoted in the same story, “This is not the kind of thing where we could have a long, drawn-out rollout. We’d have to say, ‘Here’s the deal,’ and then get to the floor and get it passed before anyone can mobilize against it.”

The Roll Call story also reiterated Big Labor’s plan to ensure that the anti-worker card check provision remains in the bill. In a recent statement, Service Employees International Union President Andy Stern said that Big Labor expects “a vote on a majority signup [aka card check] provision in the final bill or by amendment in both houses of Congress."

EFCA continues to face serious hurdles and bi-partisan opposition, as the controversial card check and binding interest arbitration provisions remain in the bill. Alternative proposals such as ambush elections and workplace access face similar skepticism because of their harmful impact on workers and small businesses. There is no difference between the anti-worker card check scheme and ambush elections which would penalize small businesses and workers. They both deny workers the opportunity to hear both sides of the debate before a secret ballot election is held. For small employers who are focused on running their businesses, ambush elections deny them the time to ensure that the process is fair. Along with that, allowing professional union organizers on the jobsite is equally as troubling. Current laws already allow employees who support the union to campaign on company property and for paid union organizers to contact workers outside the workplace, such as making visits to an employee’s home. Conversely, employers are not allowed to contact employees during non-work hours.

“Forced card check coupled with the job-killing binding interest arbitration provision suggests that the EFCA still remains politically toxic, despite efforts to produce what appears to be a one-sided ‘compromise,’” said Brian Worth, chairman of the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace. “Apparently ‘compromise’ means whatever Big Labor can get passed notwithstanding their ultimate plan for denying workers secret ballots.”

WSJ Article

The New Old 'Card Check'

Labor's top priority isn't dead yet.

Politicians don't typically broadcast their defeat, and when they do it pays to watch for the blindside hit. That's surely the case with last week's reports that six liberal Senators are abandoning part of labor's top priority, "card check" legislation.....   

Click here to read the entire article.

CDW Letter on Compromise

CDW Members: Today’s New York Times reports that a small group of Senate Democrats may be close to agreeing upon new version of EFCA, which would be introduced under the guise of “compromise” despite being nothing more than re-packaged EFCA. The Times report states that new EFCA would not contain the existing version of card-check, but instead allow for “quickie” elections and workplace access for union organizers while still presumably foisting binding interest arbitration on employers and employees. Read the entire article here.

In response to the Times story, SEIU head Andy Stern has stated that “we expect a vote on a majority signup provision in the final bill or by amendment in both houses of Congress."

Compromise=EFCA……or worse…..

These EFCA variations have been floated in the past and CDW has effectively pushed back on these proposals as nothing more than a repackaging of EFCA. While proponents of EFCA have started to advance what they deem to be “reasonable” alternatives to card-check, it is crucial that CDW members remember that “compromise” is simply a legislative trick to get to 60 votes in the Senate. After cloture has been invoked on a “compromise” bill, EFCA supporters can insert card-check as an amendment on the Senate floor, or simply wait until the conference committee with the House to make the changes they want.

The House can pass EFCA, as is, whenever the Speaker decides to do so. Therefore, EFCA looms over any debate on “labor law reform” much like the sword hanging tenuously over the head of Damocles, effectively eliminating the possibility of serious debate on the subject.

CDW Talking Points

Please see the attached TPs that address proposals such as “quickie” elections and workplace access. Also helpful is CDW’s letter to the Senate, dated May 6 of this year, which outlines the serious problems with proposals for the alternative versions of EFCA. You can read that letter here.

Remember, NO on cloture, NO on compromise. Keep up the good work and we’ll keep you updated with any new developments.

Brian Worth

Independent Electrical Contractors, Inc

VP for Government and Public Affairs

WSJ Article

The Free Choice Act and Binding Arbitration

Shikha Dalmia

Big Labor is on a roll. With the installation of Minnesota Democrat Al Franken to the Senate this week, and another change of heart by Sen. Arlen Specter, the misnamed Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) has just scored two more votes. To secure the remaining votes for a filibuster-proof majority, unions are planning a massive rally today in Arkansas to pressure Blanche Lincoln, the state's Democratic senator who has withdrawn her support for the bill, to pull a Specter and change her mind yet again...

Click here for the entire article.

CDW Letter - Binding Arbitration

CDW’s most recent letter to the Hill, this one focusing on binding interest arbitration:

 No Compromise on Binding Interest Arbitration

Dear Senator:

As you and your colleagues continue to debate the numerous important issues currently

confronting our nation, we write to express our strong opposition to any effort to

pass provisions included in the Employee Free Choice Act (H.R. 1409/S. 560), and to ask

that you oppose any related legislation presented under the guise of “compromise.”

The Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW), a group of more than 580

organizations, is united in opposition to all provisions in the Employee Free Choice Act

(EFCA) because we believe this bill severely undermines long standing principles of

balance and fairness in federal labor law.

While the issue of card-check organizing has been the focal point of most of the debate

surrounding EFCA (and, rightfully so, since card-check would deny working men and

women the opportunity to privately decide whether to join a union), EFCA’s imposition

of government-mandated, binding interest arbitration on private employers of all sizes

will be as detrimental to workplace rights, and even more threatening to job creation than

card-check.

Now, proponents of EFCA have begun a campaign to make the radical seem reasonable;

suggesting the EFCA’s binding interest arbitration is comparable to the dispute

arbitration that can currently be used in the private sector. Nothing could be further from

the truth, and these attempts by EFCA supporters to normalize an idea as onerous as

government intervention through binding interest arbitration show desperation in regards

to a bill whose support is regularly decreasing.

The differences between dispute arbitration and EFCA’s mandatory binding interest

arbitration are extremely significant. Dispute arbitration takes place when both parties

enter into an agreement to settle a dispute, as an alternative to litigating a disagreement

with particular contractual terms. Binding interest arbitration, as proposed in EFCA,

allows federal government arbitrators to dictate terms of a labor contract if parties have

not yet come to a voluntary agreement on a first contract within 120 days of good-faith

bargaining. EFCA’s proposed binding interest arbitration forces employees, their union

representative and the employer to accept a contract (written by the arbitrator) for two

years.

In dispute arbitration, the arbitrators interpret the law or previously agreed to contracts or

contract terms with a general right of the parties to appeal. However, under EFCA’s

binding interest arbitration, the arbitrators, who are unlikely to have any relevant business

experience, will dictate the terms of a labor contract that involves almost every facet of

how a business is run, including pay, benefits, and work rules with no right of the parties

to appeal the arbitrator’s final contract.

In short, under dispute arbitration, arbitrators are interpreting contracts and the law,

which is essentially what they are trained to do. Under EFCA, the arbitrators are making

business decisions on every aspect of company operations, even though they may lack

any business experience, let alone have any expertise with the pertinent industry or

specific company.

Clearly, there is nothing common about EFCA’s binding interest arbitration. The

continued attempts to find a so-called “compromise” on EFCA are running into the same

road blocks—the impossibility of negotiating on proposals as radical and out-of-touch as

binding interest arbitration and card-check.

We therefore urge you to oppose this job-killing legislation, and to oppose any legislation

offered under the guise of “compromise” that alters the nation's long standing and time

tested collective bargaining process by imposing any form of mandatory binding

arbitration. More information, analyses, and polling data showing that more than 72

percent of voters believe that binding interest arbitration is “unwise and risky,” can be

found on our coalition’s website at www.myprivateballot.com.

Sincerely,

THE COALITION FOR A DEMOCRATIC WORKPLACE

New ToolBox Talk Posted

Excavation and Trenching is the topic for the new ToolBox Talk.  The downloadable PDF can be found here on the APCA website.

OSHA News Release

U.S. Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis unveils Texas construction safety

initiative at conference of American Society of Safety Engineers

During 1st official visit to San Antonio, Solis also announces training grants for veterans

 

SAN ANTONIO — Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis today addressed the annual gathering of the American Society of Safety Engineers.  She applauded the efforts of the nation’s safety and health professionals, and announced that the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) will launch a major construction safety initiative in Texas to prevent workplace injuries and fatalities.

 

“Beginning in July, OSHA will increase the number of inspectors in Texas for a concentrated effort to prevent injuries and fatalities at construction sites. When these inspectors observe unsafe scaffolds, fall risks, trenches or other hazards, they are empowered to launch an immediate investigation,” announced Secretary Solis. “As I have said since my first day on the job — the U.S. Department of Labor is back in the enforcement business.”

 

More workers die in Texas than in any other state.  In 2008, there were 67 construction industry fatalities, and in 2009 there already have been 33. The rate of Hispanic fatalities in construction is especially alarming, having increased by 125 percent between 1992 and 2005.  In 2007 and 2008, more than 3,000 inspections were conducted by OSHA in southeastern states.  The agency cited a total of 4,390 violations.

 

Solis also met today with local business, higher education and union leaders at a breakfast event hosted by the University of Texas San Antonio, where she emphasized her commitment to jobs that are good, safe, secure and green. Afterward, Secretary Solis toured H.E.B Inc., a print/mail manufacturing plant that has received OSHA’s highest level of recognition for sustained excellence in employee health and safety.

 

In the afternoon, at an informal luncheon with local veteran service organizations and members of the American G.I. Forum (AGIF), Secretary Solis announced grants totaling $600,000 in federal support for AGIF’s Veterans Outreach Program.  The latter helps homeless veterans succeed in civilian careers.  The grants were awarded under the Labor Department’s Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program.

 

The labor secretary finished her day in San Antonio with a visit to the Brooke Army Medical Center, where she met with a group of wounded warriors and their families and toured the Center for the Intrepid. The Labor Department’s “REALifelines” program at Brooke assists wounded veterans and their family members with employment services.

 

“I would not dream of coming to Texas without visiting our veterans, service members and their families,” said Solis. “These men and women have sacrificed enormously for our nation, and they deserve our support.”