An OpEd in today’s Washington Post further demonstrates an attempt by labor leaders to make the case for EFCA by putting out yet another “academic” study to demonize employers. Facing waning support for the Employee FORCED Choice Act on Capitol Hill, labor supported groups like American Rights at Work and the Economic Policy Institute seek to distort the current structure of our labor law system.
As we’ve noted previously, this “study” by Kate Bronfenbrenner is far from a serious attempt to accurately portray the current union organizing process. The authors fails to disclose that her “study” sampled responses from union organizers – which is hardly an impartial sample. Most of the allegations that are purported in this piece are simply that – allegations. Most of these allegations aren’t even found to have actual grounds.
In reality, employees that wish to form a union are able to do so in the current system. Looking at impartial NLRB data, we find that in 2008 unions gain 400,000 new members, while unions won 67 percent of union representation elections. Almost all of these elections (95 percent) were held within 56 days. While yes there may be small amount of employers that break the law, labor groups are attempting to portray these instances as the norm rather than recognizing how our current labor law system actually functions.
It is irresponsible to describe the Employee Free Choice Act as “labor law reform.” Instead, it would actually expose workers to increased opportunities for intimidation and coercion. The legislation also changes the nature of collective bargaining by removing the ability to seek mutually negotiated terms by imposing binding interest arbitration.