Since 1935 only 42 cases involving intimidation and fraud in the collection of sign up cards have been filed. Every year for the past two decades, according to NLRB data, over 20,000 workers have been awarded back pay because employers have interfered with their freedom to choose a union and bargain collectively. The Campaign For American Future

I have said for 25+yrs. that our unions have just ran rampant against our very own work force,and are driving us towards socialism far faster than we think! Reader's,stop this bill and stop it for good or face the consequences! Communism strikes a blow against the American worker!

Employers are telling their side all the time. complaints against union organizing number in the hundreds since the 30`s. complaints of company pressure were over 25,000 in one year, just a few years ago. the evidence shows companies abuse the process, not the unions.

Might want to check the history of the Union(s). Don't exactly believe they are as pure of heart as some seem to make out.

Under the current National Labor Relations Act, union organizers can ask for an election if 30% of the workforce or more sign cards.

Organizers typically will not move forward without 75%+ because many workers signing cards are doing so to "get along" or get the organizer off their back.

They know that when the employer has a chance to tell its side of why operating merit has such a value to the company and to the workforce, many of the signers will vote against the union.

You might think that with the steep decline in union membership since the 1950s (30%+ to less than 10% in many states and industries) you would think unions lose these secret ballot elections.

Why else would they want to do away with secret ballots?

Make no mistake - read the EFCA - at 50%+1 the union is recognized and there is no election at that point.

Point of fact is that unions win over 60% of all secret ballot elections in this country. (Go to the NLRB website and search for union election results.)

What is their goal? 100%.

They can only get that through the personal intimidation that they can and do use now to "convince" employees to sign cards.

Workers should be concerned that if this passes, unions will step into otherwise successful small businesses and destroy them. They have already wrecked most major manufacturers, and even as those companies decline, unions refuse to help keep them afloat. (Google "unions refuse to help Boston Globe.")

They recently refused to compromise with the New York Democratic governor to preserve jobs and would rather see thousands of recently hired workers fired so that the senior workers keep high pay and benefits.

EFCA is a job killer. It and should be defeated.

well if the u.s. chamber of commerce is involved, it sure as hell isn't good for the American worker.

This bill will only open the door to deception, harassment, or worse actions. It's not over yet. I was on the US Chamber's site and found this letter you can send to the folks in Congressif you have a spare moment: http://capwiz.com/friendsoftheuschamber/.... We need to make sure every worker has the freedom to choose what's best for themselves and their families.

Employee Free Choice Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) (H.R. 1409, S. 560) is pending legislation in the United States. Its text states that it would "amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish an easier system to enable employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to provide for mandatory injunctions for unfair labor practices during organizing efforts, and for other purposes."[1] The latest version was introduced into both chambers of the U.S. Congress on 10 March 2009.[2]

In order for a workplace to organize under current U.S. labor law, the card check process begins when an employee requests blank cards from an existing union, and requests signatures on the cards from his or her colleagues.[3] Once 30% of the work force in a particular workplace bargaining unit has signed the cards, the employer may decide to hold a secret ballot election on the question of unionization.[3] In practice, the results of the card check usually are not presented to the employer until 50 or 60% of bargaining-unit employees have signed the cards.[3] If the employer decides to demand an election, and the majority of votes in the election favor the union, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) will certify it as the exclusive representative of the employees of that particular bargaining unit for the purpose of collective bargaining.

If enacted, the EFCA would change the currently existing procedure to require the NLRB to certify the union as the bargaining representative without directing an election if a majority of employees signed cards.[1] The EFCA would take away employers' present right to decide whether to use only the card-check process or to hold a secret-ballot election among employees in a particular bargaining unit, and instead give the right to the employees to choose a secret-ballot election in cases where less than a majority of employees has chosen to unionize through card-check.[3][4] The proposed legislation would still require a secret-ballot election when at least 30% of employees petition for an election.[3][5]

The proposed legislation would also establish stricter penalties for employers who violate provisions of the NLRA when workers seek to form a union, and set in place new mediation and arbitration procedures for disputes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employee_Fr...
+
Normally you couldn't pay me to site wikipedia but this appears to be an unbiased summary of the Free Choice Act. If read carefully everyone can see how BOTH SIDES are twisting the truth.
+
The gazette needs to ensure both sides are fairly represented.

I am not sure how I feel about this law but I have heard the other side represented and they claim people still have the option to keep their opinion anonymous if they want.

Here is a website with the other side...
http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceat...

Strengthens Penalties against Companies which Break the Law During Organizing Campaigns and First Contract Negotiations.
Company violations have become epidemic in large part because remedies for corporate misconduct, such as illegal firings of union supporters, are so weak that companies treat them as a cost of doing business and a cheap way to scare workers away from their union support. New, tougher remedies will provide more protection for workers’ rights.
a. Civil Penalties: Up to $20,000 per violation against companies found to have willfully or repeatedly violated employees’ rights during an organizing campaign or first contract negotiations.
b. Treble Back Pay: Increases to three times back pay the amount a company is required to pay when an employee is discharged or discriminated against during an organizing campaign or first contract negotiations.
c. Mandatory Applications for Injunctive Remedies: Requires the NLRB to seek a federal court injunction when there is reasonable cause to believe a company has discharged or discriminated against employees, threatened to do so, or engaged in conduct that significantly interferes with employee rights during an organizing campaign or first contract negotiations. Equalizes remedies by making mandatory injunctive remedies against companies the same as the currently required injunctive remedies against unions.

Depending on if you are pro or anti union might make it difficult to look at things fairly. Personally, I don't mind unions, they work for some and like anything fail for some. I do believe people should be able to join or not without being harrassed.
I think this law works toward that.

If after 30% of the workers sign a card, they can demand a secret ballot. That will not change.You have to sign a card now, the union people already know who signs, and it is not supposed to be released to the employer. After negotiating for four months an arbiter sounds like a good idea.

It would seem from this limited opinion piece authored by two Contractor representatives that the reasoning is that we need to know the people voting have been working there for more than few hours. It prevents the employer from stuffing the ballot box? History is full of employers locking fire exits, hiring thugs to kill and beat people up, hiring the police to shoot workers in the back and yet somehow it is the laborer and the people who protect them from locked fire doors and unsafe working conditions who are the villains. FLOL.

The "card check" vote is a feeble attempt to take away the employees choice. It opens up the employee to intimidation from all sides if he/she does not go with their wishes. The union nor the business need to know who voted how, they only need to know yes or no. If legislation is passed authorizing this, it will be the beginning of the end of free choice. Also, would this pass as constitutional?