Keep an eye out for the newly proposed changes to the National Labor Relations Act. They are remarkably similar to the " target="_hplink">Employee Free Choice Act. The proposed EFCA has been nicely tucked away on the back burner since it died in the Senate in 2009 due to bi-partisan opposition. It has again, raised its ugly head in a new form; The National Labor Relations Board is planning to circumvent Congress to make changes to the National Labor Relations Act that can accomplish most of the goals of the EFCA.
The EFCA
A union could be certified based on signature cards that would be solicited by seemingly credible union organizers with no confidential vote. No privacy, the results would be available with employee name and show of interest to the employer. If no agreement could be reached in 120 days, a government arbitrator would force an agreement.
The EFCA did not gain the needed momentum to pass in Congress and was not even supported by major players in the Democratic party. It was, and is however, supported by president Obama. In April, 2008, Mr. Obama said in a labor federation meeting, "Let's stand up to the business lobby that's been getting their friends in Washington to block card check. I've fought to pass the Employee Free Choice Act in the Senate. And I will make it the law of the land when I'm President of the United States of America."
In May, 2009, former Senator and Democratic presidential candidate, George McGovern claimed the provisions of "The 'Free Choice' Act is Anything But." McGovern's concern was the elimination of the secret ballots as well as the government involvement in the creation of a labor contract. Government arbitrators will be telling businesses how and what to pay their employees. Current labor law provides mediation assistance but this is a quantum leap into federal control of companies.
Even former president of the AFL-CIO George Meany did not support mandatory arbitration calling it "an abrogation of freedom." Claiming that government officials without the depth of understanding of a business could make an enforceable decision about provisions of a labor agreement that both the company and employees would need to live with.. Advocate for unions if you wish but don't mandate.
Recently, labor leaders have been making threats to withhold financial support for candidates. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said "(they) would withhold financial support in next year's election from candidates who haven't sided with unions consistently." Further, Trumka claims the National Labor Relations Board is fraught with delay.
A coincidence? This week, the National Labor Relations Board proposed this little known circumvention of Congress, a new version of the EFCA. This proposed change would dramatically affect the rules for unionization.
Included in the proposed NLRB Regulation:
- Election process would remain, but the time between a card check process and a vote would be radically diminished. The goal is limited communication between employer and employees.
- Employers will be required to provide employee phone numbers and e-mail addresses to the union organizers.
- The current time frame for a representation election is roughly 42 days. The proposed election will take place a targeted 10 to 21 days after the card check process.. Keep in mind, union organizers have been working on an organizational campaign for many months before the card check. Who does this benefit? Not employees.
This is clearly a new, first step at creating a new, diminished version of the EFCA. It doesn't go all the way, but it's a giant first step.
The next phase will probably include more changes from the EFCA. There will likely be a new variation that would give the NRLB power to create wages and working conditions for employers by commanding mandatory arbitration to create a labor agreement. Unions could stonewall management proposals to bring in a government arbitrator.
Will this result in more jobs to our failing economy? Will more businesses like Boeing be sued if they expand to Right to Work States? Will businesses need to eliminate jobs due to yet more government regulation? Will companies expand and invest in employees? This is bad for jobs, bad for informed employees, and bad for economic growth.
Whether you are an employee or employer, take heed; you need to know how this new regulation would affect you and your rights. Employees need to be aware that uninformed promises may affect their careers. Be careful of empty promises, been there. Employers are not always stellar but realistically, they are the holder of the purse strings and they need an opportunity to communicate. Whatever your views, keep your eyes wide open. Make an informed decision whichever way you vote. This is a double edged sword that could damage both employees and employers.
Note: There will be a public hearing announced by the National Labor Relations Board to be held in mid-July. If you have comments or concerns, you can submit them on Regulations.gov for the next 60 days.
�
�
�
Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wendy-n-powell/the-employee-free-choice-_b_882268.html
Sofía Vergara Paulina Rubio Nicollette Sheridan Padma Lakshmi Karen Carreno
No comments:
Post a Comment