AP source: Unions OK drop of 'card check' in bill

[babylonsister]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_LABOR_ORGANIZING?SITE=CONGRA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

AP source: Unions OK drop of 'card check' in bill

By SAM HANANEL
Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Labor leaders and Senate Democrats are nearing a deal on a union organizing bill that would allow employers to still demand secret ballot elections before having to recognize a union.

A Democratic official familiar with compromise talks on a bill to make forming union easier says union leaders are willing to drop the politically volatile "card check" provision to win the bill's passage.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because negotiations are still ongoing.

Card check would require a business to recognize a union once a majority of is workers signed union cards. Businesses vehemently oppose that idea.

Any compromise would still include other factors that would give labor a victory. The bill calls for binding arbitration if a new union and management can't agree on a first contract.

[Cant trust em]

1. Interesting.

I'm marking this to see what the rest of the DUniverse has to say about it.

[scheming daemons]

2. What do they get in return? This is a pretty big chip to relinquish

[babylonsister]

4. Here's something that might better inform you...

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/07/cutting_a_deal_on_efca.php?ref=fpblg

Cutting a Deal on EFCA
07.17.09 -- 1:53PM
By Josh Marshall

I was pretty stunned to see the beginnings of a compromise coming into place this morning that would have the 'card check' provisions pulled from the Employee Free Choice Act. At least in the superficial debate, the two have been treated as more or less synonymous, though that's clearly not case -- I don't think anyone would disagree that there are a number of other very important provisions in the bill.

Here's what TPM Reader JS has to say ...

I'm a labor attorney that has spent most of my career on management's side. If you Google my name, that's what you'll find. Recently, I've started doing some employee-side work. Fwiw, my opinion is that this EFCA compromise is really what organized labor wants and has always wanted. Business took the bait with the card check issue and thought they had won.

Michael Fox, a labor attorney and blogger, says that card check has always just been a stalking horse for the other planks of EFCA. In fact, what gives angst to some conservative legal scholars more than the card check is the forced arbitration. Someone wrote an article (it was in the WSJ, I think) that the arbitration provision would be unconstitutional. The quickie elections are important to. I don't agree with "stalking horse" exactly. To me it was more of a bargaining chip they were willing to sacrifice if needed.

The reason for this is clear to me: card check has not had a statistically significant impact on organizing success rates in jurisdictions where it has been tried. There are studies out there on Canada that show that. Getting a union recognized doesn't matter if they union can't negotiate a contract before people give up on them. Businesses will just hold out on a contract. This bill won't let them do that. As for the quickie elections, it doesn't give management enough time to wage their campaigns to be as effective in changing the vote.

If those two provisions pass, it's probably the biggest labor law reform since Taft-Hartley in 1948, and unlike that law, it's a huge win for labor.

If you look at Brian's update from this morning at TPMDC, there does seem to be a basic cleavage in the responses from the AFL-CIO and Andy Stern/SEIU. In any case, I know there are a lot of labor movement readers we have. So I'm very curious to hear what people think of today's developments.

[Pirate Smile]

6. Yep - Republicans and Business took the bait. Now the Dems can drop it which provides cover

to the moderates/conservative Dems and pass what they were hoping to get.

[wtbymark]

3. I don't know

it might be an acceptable compromise. May want to strengthen the arbitration provisions. Seems that most unions can't get off the ground because of a lack of a first contract.

What say you Omaha Steve?

[alc]

5. if 50% employees will sign the card

which the employer may potentially see and retaliate no matter what the law says, why wouldn't they vote yes in the secret ballot where the employer would not know how they voted? Other parts of the bill are needed because employers abuse the current system, but I don't understand why this part is needed (or maybe I don't understand this part)

[Lone_Star_Dem]

7. Then this wasn't a bad thing?

I've never been in a union and don't know if this is going to be good or bad in the end.