The Wall Street Journal adds its voice to the many, many commentators warning that the binding arbitration provisions in the Employee Free Choice Act are just as economically dangerous and anti-worker as the bill’s elimination of secret-ballot elections in the workplace. From “Blinding Arbitration,” with the secondary headline, “A union compromise on card check deserves a much closer look.”
The binding arbitration rule would also strip workers of valuable rights. They would no longer be able to vote on a contract that their unions negotiated with management and submitted back for rank-and-file approval. This will make union leaders less accountable.
Arbitration would also make the difficult job of getting rid of a union harder. Federal law limits the time periods when workers can petition to decertify a union. For new unions, workers can petition if the union has gone a year without securing a contract. Under arbitration, workers could only boot their union at the end of the government-imposed contract. So the bill also provides a form of job protection — for unions, not workers.
Unions have been holding vigils and other PR stunts this week trying to apply pressure on Senators. But as the Wall Street Journal notes, EFCA isn’t about protecting workers, it’s about protecting union bosses. And why would you light a candle for them?
Latest posts by Carter Wood (see all)
- Farewell from a Blogger - May 25, 2011
- Activist Ignore Evidence to Back Shakedown Suit Against Chevron - May 25, 2011
- More than a Lawsuit: A Circle of Political Pressure Against Chevron - May 25, 2011