FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

A Ray of Hope for Organized Labor

by DAVID MACARAY

Unions don’t have to search very hard for reasons to distrust or resent the Democratic Party. For openers, they can go back to 1947, when the crippling, anti-labor Taft-Hartley Act was passed, with the help of congressional Democrats, over President Truman’s veto. Historians and Party apologists can quibble all they like over why it happened, but the undeniable fact remains that, without the Democrats’ assistance, Truman’s veto couldn’t have been overridden.

Or they can revisit 1978, when the Democrats had control of all three political arms of the government (the White House, Senate and House of Representatives), when, despite enormous pressure from the labor lobby, the Party refused to overhaul the Taft-Hartley Act. With power firmly in their hands, and the stars in alignment, it was a golden opportunity to fix something that badly needed fixing. Instead, they chose not to act.

In fact, 1978 was a bad year all the way around. Not only were legislative opportunities frittered away, but 1978 was the same year that President Carter invoked Taft-Hartley’s “emergency powers” provision to crush the United Mine Workers’ (UMW) national coal strike. There haven’t been many occasions where a president has invoked Taft-Hartley to quell a strike. That it was a Democrat who did it, and that it was done with a Democratic House and Senate watching his back, made it that much more painful.

Or, more recently, they can look to NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement), which went into effect on January 1, 1994. Despite virtually every union in the United States being opposed to it, President Clinton ignored their objections and warnings, and pressed forward with it, insisting that this bogus, turbo-capitalist, job-killing arrangement was the most lustrous jewel in his economic crown. If organized labor needed a reason to believe that the Democrats had not only abandoned them, but insulted them-humiliated them-NAFTA was it.

These disappointments (and many others) aside, there is currently a piece of legislation pending before congress that could be of great benefit to organized labor. And, notably, it was introduced by a Democrat (George Miller-D-CA). It’s called the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). Given its potential for altering the national landscape, this could be a landmark piece of legislation.

Should the EFCA become law, employees would be permitted to join a union without having to go through the hassle of sanctioning an NLRB election; all they’d be required to do is sign cards indicating that they wish to join (known as the “card check” method). If a majority signs such cards, the NLRB would be authorized to recognize the union as the employees’ exclusive representative in the collective bargaining process. Simple as that.

A second feature of the EFCA would be to require labor and management to submit to an arbitration board in the event that they were unable to agree on a “first” contract. The parties would be given 120 days to reach a settlement. If unable to agree to a contract during that period, the arbitration board would have full power to settle the dispute.

This proposed legislation includes other pro-labor features as well, such as calling for increased monetary penalties when management is found guilty of unfair labor practices, but the aforementioned two provisions are the most significant. It goes without saying that the “card check” shortcut (as opposed to the traditional secret ballot method) would, in principle, make unions infinitely more accessible.

Currently, union membership in the United States hovers at about 12%. But, according to polls, as many as 60% of America’s workers say they would consider joining a union if only “. . . it were made easier.” The way things stand now, management has the upper hand in these certification elections. In addition to working people being a captive audience, dependent on management for their paychecks and livelihoods, they’re also at their mercy when it comes to being bombarded by propaganda.

Not only is management able to stall a union vote for months and months, dragging out the process and thereby weakening the employees’ resolve, they regularly engage in full-blown campaigns of intimidation, coercion and bribery to get the vote they want. If management weren’t vehemently opposed to having a union shop, they wouldn’t insist on forcing an NLRB-sanctioned election in the first place.

And because so many inaugural contract negotiations entered into by a newly formed membership wind up getting stalled and jammed up by a management team looking to sabotage the collective bargaining process (even after the employees voted, fair and square, to form a union), the EFCA’s 120-day provision would prove extraordinarily useful.

It’s about time someone introduced a workable plan that prevents management from killing a fledgling union by the tactically waiting it out. If you can’t hammer out a bargain in four months, you deserve to be replaced by someone who can. Because the notion of giving an arbitrator (An outsider?? The horror!) the authority to set the specific terms of a contract would be so abhorrent, so utterly terrifying to management, it would serve as a surefire incentive to get them to negotiate in good faith.

In March of 2007, by a vote of 241 to 185, the House of Representatives passed the EFCA. Unfortunately, because a subsequent vote for cloture (which would have limited debate and moved the measure quickly to a vote) failed in the Senate (in June of ’07), it’s unlikely that the EFCA will be acted upon by the current session of Congress. For the moment, it’s been left to languish. In any event, President Bush, true to form, has already promised to veto the legislation, should it pass.

Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have come out strongly in favor of the EFCA. The result of the cloture vote in the Senate was 51-48, adhering, without deviation, to strict party lines (Senator Johnson, D-S.D., didn’t vote, due to illness). However, a vote of 60 senators is required for cloture, which means it’s going to be a battle getting this thing passed, even with a Democratic president taking over in ’09.

Still, let’s give the Democrats a little credit for carrying labor’s water. Not that this in any way makes up for the disgraces of the past. Not that it wipes the slate clean. Not that the hundreds of millions of dollars organized labor has raised for the Democrats hasn’t entitled unions to some meaningful reciprocation. But it’s a ray of light in the darkness. And if the EFCA ever gets passed, it could dramatically improve labor’s prospects for the future.

DAVID MACARAY, a Los Angeles playwright and writer, was president and chief contract negotiator of the Assn. of Western Pulp and Paper Workers, Local 672, from 1989 to 2000. He can be reached at: dmacaray@earthlink.net

 

 

 

 

 

David Macaray is a playwright and author. His newest book is How To Win Friends and Avoid Sacred Cows.  He can be reached at dmacaray@gmail.com

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
April 28, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Slandering Populism: a Chilling Media Habit
Andrew Levine
Why I Fear and Loathe Trump Even More Now Than On Election Day
Jeffrey St. Clair
Mountain of Tears: the Vanishing Glaciers of the Pacific Northwest
Philippe Marlière
The Neoliberal or the Fascist? What Should French Progressives Do?
Conn Hallinan
America’s New Nuclear Missile Endangers the World
Peter Linebaugh
Omnia Sunt Communia: May Day 2017
Vijay Prashad
Reckless in the White House
Brian Cloughley
Who Benefits From Prolonged Warfare?
Kathy Kelly
The Shame of Killing Innocent People
Ron Jacobs
Hate Speech as Free Speech: How Does That Work, Exactly?
Andre Vltchek
Middle Eastern Surgeon Speaks About “Ecology of War”
Matt Rubenstein
Which Witch Hunt? Liberal Disanalogies
Sami Awad - Yoav Litvin - Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb
Never Give Up: Nonviolent Civilian Resistance, Healing and Active Hope in the Holyland
Pete Dolack
Tribunal Finds Monsanto an Abuser of Human Rights and Environment
Christopher Ketcham
The Coyote Hunt
Mike Whitney
Putin’s New World Order
Ramzy Baroud
Palestinian, Jewish Voices Must Jointly Challenge Israel’s Past
Ralph Nader
Trump’s 100 Days of Rage and Rapacity
Harvey Wasserman
Marine Le Pen Is a Fascist—Not a ‘Right-Wing Populist,’ Which Is a Contradiction in Terms
William Hawes
World War Whatever
John Stanton
War With North Korea: No Joke
Jim Goodman
NAFTA Needs to be Replaced, Not Renegotiated
Murray Dobbin
What is the Antidote to Trumpism?
Louis Proyect
Left Power in an Age of Capitalist Decay
Medea Benjamin
Women Beware: Saudi Arabia Charged with Shaping Global Standards for Women’s Equality
Rev. William Alberts
Selling Spiritual Care
Peter Lee
Invasion of the Pretty People, Kamala Harris Edition
Cal Winslow
A Special Obscenity: “Guernica” Today
Binoy Kampmark
Turkey’s Kurdish Agenda
Guillermo R. Gil
The Senator Visits Río Piedras
Jeff Mackler
Mumia Abu-Jamal Fights for a New Trial and Freedom 
Cesar Chelala
The Responsibility of Rich Countries in Yemen’s Crisis
Leslie Watson Malachi
Women’s Health is on the Chopping Block, Again
Basav Sen
The Coal Industry is a Job Killer
Judith Bello
Rojava, a Popular Imperial Project
Robert Koehler
A Public Plan for Peace
Sam Pizzigati
The Insider Who Blew the Whistle on Corporate Greed
Nyla Ali Khan
There Has to be a Way Out of the Labyrinth
Michael J. Sainato
Trump Scales Back Antiquities Act, Which Helped to Create National Parks
Stu Harrison
Under Duterte, Filipino Youth Struggle for Real Change
Martin Billheimer
Balm for Goat’s Milk
Stephen Martin
Spooky Cookies and Algorithmic Steps Dystopian
Michael Doliner
Thank You Note
Charles R. Larson
Review: Gregor Hens’ “Nicotine”
David Yearsley
Handel’s Executioner
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail