To counter a multi-million dollar ad campaign launched by anti-worker groups opposed to the Employee Free Choice Act, a number of unions and labor-backed organizations like American Rights at Work, have launched their own ad campaign promoting the proposed bill.
Supporters of the law, point out that recent polls indicate that close 60 million US workers would join a labor union if they had the chance. About two in three in four workers, including 60 percent of those who identify as Republicans, favor passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, and almost three in four Americans see unions as a positive thing for the US economy.
The Employee Free Choice Act would alter existing US labor laws in three basic ways. First, the law would strengthen penalties against employers who break the law when they pressure employees not to join or organize unions. Some employers use illegal threats to fire union members or to say they will close the workplace down and move out of the country. Others hold mandatory "captive audience" meetings, like those held at Wal-Mart recently disclosed in the press, to pressure workers to refuse to join a union.
Workers' rights advocates say this is important because harassment of and threats against workers who join unions are illegal, current penalties provide no incentive for employers to obey the law.
Second, the bill allows employees and employers to bring contract negotiations to federal mediation quickly. While this important provision helps to reduce the length of contract disputes, it is helpful for workers especially who face employers who use the existing federal bureaucracy to stall negotiations or delay bargaining sessions.
Finally, the bill would speed up the unionization process by requiring an employer to recognize the union in a workplace once the majority of employees have joined the union and asked for its representation at the bargaining table. Current law allows an employer to refuse to recognize a union even if 100 percent of the workers joined.
Many employers also use existing federal bureaucracy to stall recognition of the union long enough to use illegal anti-union tactics in the workplace to force employees to change their minds. And on top of it, they face little or no penalty for violating the law in this manner.
Opponents of the Employee Free Choice Act, such as Richard Berman and his Center for Consumer Freedom, which, incidentally has led campaigns against Mothers Against Drunk Driving, for the Big Tobacco lobby, and against public school teachers, have misleadingly stated the law would strip workers of their privacy by forcing them to reveal their Social Security numbers.
Supporters of the bill point out that the law does no such thing and protects democracy in the workplace. So far, a joint effort by the AFL-CIO, Change to Win, and American Rights at Work has gathered close to 600,000 signatures on a national petition. The aim is to turn in at least 1 million signatures by the time the new session of Congress begins in January.
