the employee free choice act (efca) is proposed americanlegislation which aims to "amend the national labor relations act to establish an efficient 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] under current labor law, the u.s. national labor relations board will certify a union as the exclusive representative of employees if it is elected by either a majority signature drive, the card check process, or by secret ballot nlrb election, which is held if more than 30% of employees in a bargaining unit sign statements asking for representation by a union. under the efca, an employer would no longer have the opportunity to demand a secret ballot election when a majority of employees have signed union cards and there is no evidence of illegal coercion. in addition, the act would require parties who cannot agree upon the terms of a first collective bargaining contract within 120 days to submit the issues to an arbitration board, which would be empowered to settle the dispute. finally, the act would provide for liquidated damages of two times back pay for certain unfair labor practices.
please read up on the secret ballot protection act and who supports it.
the secret ballot protection act would prohibit a union from being recognized based on a card check, provide that a union may only be recognized by an employer following certification by the nlrb if it has won majority support in a secret ballot election conducted by the nlrb, and guarantee the right of every worker to a secret-ballot vote on decisions to unionize
Specializes in Cardiac Critical Care, Trauma, Neuro..
if there was free access and ability to distribute information ,pro and anti union during a unionization drive there would be no need for either a employee free choice act
or
secret ballot protection act
here is another source of information on the secret ballot protection act:
the original sponsor of the bill, congressman charlie norwood of georgia passed away after battling cancer. his colleagues have since carried the ball for him.
i don't fully disagree with you about ability to distribute information. i worked hard at my hospital to distribute information on why i thought unionization was a bad idea. the california nurses association made it very very difficult by enforcing a neutrality agreement with my employer. while the union was allowed inside my hospital and given conference rooms to hold meetings on unionizing. i was not allowed to do the same. i had to distribute my leaflets from the sidewalk outside the hospital. i was denied access to conference rooms at the demand of the union. the union had full access to the whole hospital. if i wanted to discuss my view on my day off i was told security would escort me off the premises. this was all because of california nurses association enforced "neutrality agreement" with my employer.
i cannot for the life of me understand why voting by secret ballot in the privacy of a voting booth would be under attack? card check elections just stink of fraud and would always be suspect and subject to question. it would drag the whole process out with demands for investigation, verification of signatures. claims of intimidation would skyrocket. if any of you union supporters working in a unionized hospital came to work one day and found that your union was removed, voted out in a card check drive would you accept that without question? why not? thats the way the "employee free choice act" would allow the union to be voted in. why can't we remove them the same way?
no matter how many people hound you from both sides of the argument, in the sanctity of the voting booth your vote is sacred and private. no one is looking over your shoulder.
I can understand your frustration that your employer ,who had agreed with CNA ( the CNA cannot force any agreement upon an employer , that is a decision made by the employer alone ) , to restrict you in your desire to distribute information .But that would have been the situation faced by the union supporters prior to the neutrality agreement .I believe both management and the union agree to a neutrality agreement because it allows them both to control the message they wish to portray .
I believe that you need to be able to freely put forth both sides of an argument to any electorate , which is not what is happening now ( in our case management was able to vet all the unions publicity before it was distributed , they were able to disavow any and all unsourced anti union publications) . Unfortunately for you because the source of your information was identifiable ,management could not disavow it and had to enforce the neutrality clause with or without CNA input .
I think we both believe in the power of a secret ballot , we also agree that both sides of the argument should be presented freely to the electorate . But you appear to believe that the Unions alone control the flow of information in the debate whilst I believe that Management controls the flow of information.
Specializes in Cardiac Critical Care, Trauma, Neuro..
quote
I think we both believe in the power of a secret ballot , we also agree that both sides of the argument should be presented freely to the electorate . But you appear to believe that the Unions alone control the flow of information in the debate whilst I believe that Management controls the flow of information.
I have participated directly and indirectly on union votes many times. I believe that anyone and everyone involved has the responsibility to educate themselves on the issue at hand and not blindly vote for or against something because "my friend said so".
The title "Employee Free Choice" is clearly misleading. How free a choice can you make when surrounded by your peers some saying "sign this card" others saying "don't sign the card". The information on the cards is even misleading. I am looking at cards right now some from the CNA, some from the SEIU another from UNAC. What signing the card means is not clear.
"Secret Ballot Protection" is clear. It protects and demands protection of your right to vote in a secret ballot. Free from intimidation. No one knows how you voted unless you tell them.
too few ever get that chance because employers routinely block their efforts to form unions—and our current legal system is too broken to stop them. as many as one-quarter of employers illegally fire workers who try to form unions.
the employee free choice act would give workers a fair chance to form unions to improve their lives by:
allowing them to form unions by signing cards authorizing union representation.
providing mediation and arbitration for first-contract disputes.
establishing stronger penalties for violation of employee rights when workers seek to form a union and during first-contract negotiations.
more than three-quarters of americans—77 percent—support strong laws that give employees the freedom to make their own choice about whether to have a union in their workplace without interference from management (pdf).
allowing working people to choose for themselves whether to have a union is the key step toward rebuilding america’s middle class. union membership brings better wages and benefits and a real voice on the job (pdf). it’s no accident that the 25-year decline in workers’ wages in our country has paralleled a 25-year slide in the size of the america’s unions.
the employee free choice act would put democracy back into the workplace. majority sign-up would ensure the decision whether to form a union was made by majority choice, not by the employer unilaterally.
workers can still vote under the employee free choice act. at any time, if 30 percent of the workers want an election, they can have one. and once they have a union, workers also vote to elect their union representatives.
the afl-cio union movement is working in many ways to restore good jobs, health care and retirement security—but passing the employee free choice act is our top priority because we cannot create balance for working people or rebuild the middle class unless workers genuinely have the freedom to form unions for a better life.
business special interest groups have launched a massive pr campaign to derail reform of the nation's broken labor law system by cranking out misleading propaganda. here are the facts to refute the opposition's fiction about the employee free choice act.
fiction: the "legislation would end the rights of employees to secret ballot elections."– center for union facts
fact:the employee free choice act does not abolish elections. under the proposed legislation, workers get to choose the union formation process—elections or majority sign-up. what the employee free choice act does prevent is an employer manipulating the flawed system to influence the election outcome.
when faced with organizing campaigns: 25 percent of employers illegally fire pro-union workers; 51 percent of employers illegally threaten to close down worksites if the union prevails; and, 34 percent of employers coerce workers into opposing the union with bribes and favoritism.
fiction: "legal recognition of a union has traditionally been achieved through secret ballot elections…just like how a person votes for a senator or congressman." – center for union facts
fact:current union elections involving secret ballots bear no resemblance to political elections. workers' free speech rights are squelched, employers practice various forms of economic coercion, and labor law allows employers to indefinitely delay recognition through drawn-out appeals. says university of oregon political scientist gordon lafer, "the presence of secret ballots can't overcome the corrupt nature of nlrb elections."
fiction:nlrb elections are "the only way to guarantee worker protection from coercion and intimidation."
– coalition for a democratic workplace
fact: workers are more susceptible to coercion in nlrb elections than majority sign-up.workers in nlrb elections are twice as likely (46 percent vs. 23 percent) as those in majority sign-up campaigns to report that management coerced them to oppose the union. further, less than one in 20 workers (4.6 percent) who signed a card with a union organizer reported that the presence of the organizer made them feel pressured to sign the card.
as i said in response #12 " if there was free access and ability to distribute information ,pro and anti union during a unionization drive there would be no need for either a employee free choice act
or
secret ballot protection act
"
the anti union side feels that a nurse cannot withstand peer pressure , to such an extent that they fold and sign cards .i'm sorry , i believe in the vast majority , nurses are perfectly capable of withstanding this " pressure " , they withstand heck of a lot more every day in their work .
if you are pro union , in a unionization drive , the pressure from an employer is more tangible , if identified by the employer they will threaten you economically , you risk your position being terminated . if as most of us you have obligations , that is no small risk !
too few ever get that chance because employers routinely block their efforts to form unions--and our current legal system is too broken to stop them. as many as one-quarter of employers illegally fire workers who try to form unions.
the afl-cio cites research (done by a firm, btw, which lists the afl-cio as one of their clients) claiming 60,000,000 workers state they would join a union if they could, then seems to blame employer coercion for keeping these workers from joining unions.
let's look at the issue a little differently. a 2005 study by zogby states, "with union memberships in decline nationally, our poll shows that just one-in-three
(35%) non-union workers would consider voting to unionize their workplace, while a 56% majority would not." my understanding is that it takes a majority vote of employees in a workplace to allow a union to represent them. in view of zogby's study, it seems to me that the main reason more workers don't belong to a union is due the fact that the majority of workers don't want to unionize and not because they are being coerced by employers.
more than three-quarters of americans--77 percent--support strong laws that give employees the freedom to make their own choice about whether to have a union in their workplace without interference from management (pdf).
i also feel strongly about employees having the freedom of choice about whether or not to have a union represent them. again from zogby, "one of the more interesting findings is support for 'right-to-work' rules among all categories of worker--both unionized and non-unionized. workers in virtually allcircumstances favor thefreedom to join or not join a union--the position that 'right to work' laws enforce."
Unfortunately, this red baiting is typical behavior for the anti-union, business interest groups, especially when it comes to politics and legislation. Some history from Unions and the Public Interest by David Brody.
This exerpt contrasts labor's (AFL-CIO) support for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with the business lobbies reaction.
"Any sign of labor's self-denial among the business lobbies? No such luck. They regarded the Civil Rights Act--to quote a National Association of Manufacturers document--as "perhaps the greatest encroachment ever undertaken by the federal government into the personal and private affairs of individual citizens" and thought a better name for it would be the "Socialist Omnibus Bill." Think about the fate of racial justice in this country had the NAM crowd prevailed."
too few ever get that chance because 
the employee free choice act would give workers a fair chance to form unions to improve their lives by: 
in the 110th congress, 
allowing working people to choose for themselves whether to have a union is the key step toward rebuilding america’s middle class. union membership brings 
the employee free choice act would put democracy back into the workplace. majority sign-up would ensure the decision whether to form a union was made by majority choice, not by the employer unilaterally.
workers can still vote under the employee free choice act. at any time, if 30 percent of the workers want an election, they can have one. and once they have a union, workers also vote to elect their union representatives. 
the afl-cio union movement is working in many ways to restore good jobs, health care and retirement security—but passing the employee free choice act is our top priority because we cannot create balance for working people or rebuild the middle class unless workers genuinely have the freedom to form unions for a better life. 
NRSKarenRN, BSN, RN
10 Articles; 19,193 Posts
When posting about legislation, please provide bill synopsis and legislation links to help educate newbies to political process.