The Wall Street Journal (subscription) today reports, “Provision to Ease Unionization Likely to Drop Out of Bill.” The lead:
Senators are working on a compromise version of a labor-organizing bill that will likely drop a contentious card-signing provision in favor of a speedier union election process, according to people familiar with the talks.
And another key paragraph:
Compromise talks are being led by Sen. Tom Harkin (D., Iowa), the bill’s lead sponsor in the Senate. Kate Cyrul, a spokeswoman for Mr. Harkin, declined to comment on details of the compromise being discussed. But she said the senator “remains confident that we can address these issues without compromising the core provisions of the bill.”
Compromise talks with WHOM? Senator Kennedy? Bernie Sanders? The SEIU and AFL-CIO? The only other Senator mentioned in the story is Specter. The premise is faulty: Negotiations between two Democrats, the lead Senate sponsor of the bill (S. 560) and a past cosponsor of the bill, Senator Specter, hardly represent the makings of a compromise.
Especially if you retain the “core provisions of the bill,” which are designed to force unionization on employees and employers who do not want union representation.
- EFCA Report, “WSJ: Sen. Harkin Shopping EFCA Compromise; 21-Day Elections, More Mediation“
- Senator Specter’s March 24th floor statement outlining his objections to the Employee Free Choice Act.
UPDATE (11:25 a.m.): Much more detail in this New York Times story, “Lines Shift a Bit on a Senate Labor Bill.” Snap elections appears to be labor’s fall-back, i.e., depriving employers of an opportunity to make their case.
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