LaborPains.org

On Thursday, August 28, 2008, Jeff Crouere of Ringside Politics with a Punch, had guest Mark Zelden accompany him on the show to discuss the Employee Free Choice Act. Mr. Zelden explains how the EFCA would affect the current unionization process, employees, unions, small businesses, and the economy.

Union bosses, the main supporters of the Act, claim that the act will provide a quick and easy process for employees to utilize when unionizing. However, as Mr. Zelden explains quick and easy do not translate into fair and good. The legislation is too premature, drastic, and quick to think of passing. The Act would eliminate the federally-supervised private ballot election and replace it with a process known as “card check.” Under card check, union organizers would only need 50% plus 1 person of employees to sign authorization cards. This would be the biggest change to labor relations since the Labor Relations Act of 1935. 

Allowing for a public decision leaves employees vulnerable to intimidation, coercion and misinformation from union organizers. Businesses are very concerned about the issue because if the Act is passed, it will upset the balance amongst employees and employers that has been established for over 60 years. Over 80% of people who participated in the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry poll believe employees should be able to choose whether they want to belong to a union through a private ballot.

The legislation is an attempt by unions to gain new members. Their membership has been declining consistently since the mid-70′s. As Zelden points out, “Altering the rules in the middle of the game when your losing is unfair.” The current process allows for fair process. In the past unions have abused their power by requesting unnecessary strikes. If this were to occur again, the economy would most definitely not survive. In addition, the dues paid by the employees are not going to help the union itself but political candidates the union supports. 

Contact Mary Landrieu and tell her to support Louisiana workers.

In this first clip, Senator Mary Landrieu continues to evade questions about her support for the deceptively-named Employee Free Choice Act, blatantly ignoring a constituent’s question.

In another encounter at a dinner event at Cafe JoJo’s in Morgan City, a college student asked Senator Landrieu why she supported the Employee Free Choice Act. Senator Landrieu was obviously not prepared to discuss this issue. She explained to the student that she supported a fair and good process but she he did not elaborate on what she meant by that statement. No wonder Senator Landrieu evades questions regarding this issue–she does not understand it even though she co-sponsored the bill. 

The Employee Free Choice Act is becoming a hot issue in Louisiana. The Shreveport area CBS affiliate, KSLA-TV is taking notice and invited Louisianans for Employee Freedom on their “News Makers” segment to discuss EFCA and the impact it will have on Louisiana workers if it passes.

Steering Committee Chairman Mark Zeldon sat down with “News Maker” Host Pat Simon to talk about the harmful effects EFCA will have in the workplace citing intimidation at work and at home, which will result in workers becoming less-likely to vote their true opinion.

Mark Zeldon explains how before the National Labor Relations Act of 1935—which provided the private ballot election—union workers were manipulative and abusive when attempting to convince employees to unionize. However, once the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 was passed, the abuses committed by the labor unions ceased. The Employee Free Choice Act effectively eliminates the private ballot election, allowing for history to repeat itself.

Zeldon points out that Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu—who co-sponsored the bill—says she supports the bill because it allows for a fair process. But as history has shown and labor union’s willingness to do anything to obtain a larger part of the workforce, the act will prove fatal to the workforce. The current process, as Zeldon has clarified, is a fair and good process for collective bargaining. Senator Landrieu must have misread or failed to read the bill she is co-sponsoring because it is neither a fair nor democratic process. 

After weeks of avoiding questions regarding her role in co-sponsoring “The Employee Free Choice Act”, Sen. Mary Landrieu finally answered the question: “Do you support a worker’s right to a secret ballot election when unionizing the workplace?” Her answer: she’s for a “fair process”.

One might wonder of Sen. Landrieu’s definition of a “fair process” is taking away an employee’s fundamental right to a private ballot vote. In fact, 58% of Louisianians oppose taking away a private ballot vote when it comes to unionizing the workplace. Even union members agree. Nearly half of Louisiana’s union households oppose changing the way unions are formed.

In her answer she also said that ‘this (EFCA) is a big issue we’re going to debate.’ We can only hope that in the coming months Sen. Landrieu will be open to such a debate and stop ducking questions from concerned citizens.

Here is Paul Carmouche’s response when interviewed on his stance toward the Employee Free Choice Act, which he is assumed to support. Carmouche is the Democratic candidate for Louisiana’s 4th Congressional District.

Mr. Carmouche states, “I was taught as a youngster in school that the majority rules, uh, so I’m going to have to look at that and see that uh, when, when uh, uh… and I’m not sure about the ballots, and the secret ballots, but uh, if a majority of workers want to have a union, then the majority probably should rule.”

While repeating that the majority should rule (which hopefully is undisputed in the mind of any candidate), he doesn’t differentiate between whether that rule should be determined by a show of hands or by writing votes on gum wrappers.

The important thing we’d like for our candidates to support is privacy in a voting booth.  The Louisianians for Employee Freedom would prefer a candidate who would simply and resolutely answer “Yes” to that fundamental question.  (“Do you support an employee’s right to a secret ballot vote when unionizing in a workplace?”)

He ends by saying, “I’m going to look at those issues and I think you’re going to find that the decision that I come to is going to be a reasonable decision.”

Don’t be surprised if his “reasonable decision” happens to be perfectly in line with the will of the union bosses who have been funneling so much money into Democratic campaigns.

After seeing activists protest against her sponsorship of the Employee Free Choice Act, Senator Mary Landrieu has interestingly shunned all regular constituents from asking her questions.  Because of her high seat vulnerability, she and her advisers are dodging questions about the controversial card check issue at all costs. She avoids these EFCA activists like Pestilence.

Co-sponsorship usually indicates serious support for and fluency with a bill.  Why do she and her advisors act like she needs to be briefed on it before even beginning to answer questions from harmless constituents?

Perhaps Landrieu, like many other legislators and candidates, is finding that faux-democracy “card check” is an undefendable issue.

Labor union PACs don’t have much to show for the $100,000+ dollars they’ve spent on the Senator’s campaign.  Senator, would you like to elaborate on your EFCA co-sponsorship?