More Important Than We Know

by digby

Here’s an article laying out some of the arguments about “Card Check” aka the Employee Free Choice Act:

Is it pay-back time or about time? When it comes to “card-check,” slang for the Employee Free-Choice Act – one of the first pieces of legislation likely to go before Congress when it reconvenes in January – it depends on who you ask.

Today, if a union organizer goes into a workplace and gets 30 percent of the employees to sign a “union interest” card, an election is ordered by the National Labor Relations Board. A secret-ballot vote is held six weeks later, giving both union and employer time to lobby the workers.

Under card-check, not so much: If a majority of employees sign a union card, then the union becomes the bargaining unit. No more six-week campaigns, no more elections. It’s a done deal; you’re essentially a union shop.
[…]

“Card-check gives a better opportunity for workers to have an easier way to form a union at their workplace,” explains Bill George, president of the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO.

He pushes back at critics who say it goes against the fundamental American right to a secret ballot: “Bottom line is that there is too much power in the hands of employers, and middle-class workers are not getting their fair share of the profits.”

“If you want to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to a union, you should be able to do that in the privacy of the voting booth,” counters James Sherk, a Bradley Fellow in Labor Policy at the Heritage Foundation.

“Promoting unionism is not a wise idea in the middle of a recession,” Sherk adds. The real issue in his mind is not whether unions are good or bad. “The issue is, are these specific conditions” – not using secret ballots – “good or bad? I would argue (that) no matter the economic circumstances, workers have the right to a private vote.

“They have the right to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on unionism without the union officials or their co-workers being aware of how they voted.”

You can make an argument that each side sees a benefit to a different process, says Purdue University professor Bert Rockman.

“Signing the union petition card is an indication of discontent with present conditions in the workforce; the unions argue that is sufficient,” he explains. Democrats are likely to cave to that argument since unions are an important, if fading, constituency of their party.

A secret ballot, on the other hand, allows employers to do many things. They can respond to some of the discontent, indicating that they care and that everyone is better off without a union, or they can argue about the cost to the workers of unionization.

Can you see what’s wrong with that argument?

The secret ballot allows employers to “indicate they care” and “argue about the cost to the workers of unionization.” Why would anyone object to that? No mention of the retaliation, threats and intimidation workers often suffer for six long weeks until they can cast their vaunted secret ballot.

This is a bizarre issue for the Republicans to go to the mattresses on, but that appears to be what they are doing. I’ve mentioned before just how weird it is that the crowds at McCain rallies would break out into a near frenzy at the mention of “secret ballot.” Clearly, the talk radio gasbags have primed them. There must be a reason why, in the midst of their doldrums and retrenchment, their guns are still blazing at something this obscure and I would guess that it’s because they feel fundamentally politically threatened by this is some ways that aren’t completely obvious. They’ve never liked unions, but I would guess that they see a particular threat in the midst of this economic crisis.

Health care and unionization — if they happen, the right has both a political and structural problem on their hands which will make it very difficult for them to come back in a big way — at least for quite some time. When it comes to our two party system, the Republicans understand quite well that these are the kinds of successes from which long term realignments are made.