• $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • other
  • use Paypal

CALLING ALL COUNTERPUNCHERS! CounterPunch’s website is one of the last common spaces on the Internet. We are supported almost entirely by the subscribers to the print edition of our magazine and by one-out-of-every-1000 readers of the site. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners to the “new” Cuba. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads or click bait. Unlike many other indy media sites, we don’t shake you down for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it. So over the next few weeks we are requesting your financial support. Keep CounterPunch free, fierce and independent by donating today by credit card through our secure online server, via PayPal or by calling 1(800) 840-3683.


Slice and Dice on Card Check


It’s been reported that a coalition of “labor friendly” retailing giants—Costco Wholesale Corporation, Starbucks Corp., and Whole Foods Markets Inc.—has met with congressional sponsors of the EFCA (Employee Free Choice Act) in the hope of reaching a compromise on the controversial legislation.  If your mind is flooded with images of foxes seeking entry to the henhouse, it’s understandable.

As most are aware by now, under the provisions of the EFCA ((H.R. 1409, S. 560), employees would be permitted to join a labor union simply by signing cards saying they wish to do so (known as the “card check” method), thus obviating a need for a full-blown NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) certification election.  If 50 per cent  sign cards, they have themselves a union.

Historically, one of the problems with certification elections has been that companies take advantage of their “captive audience” employees by subjecting them to an unremitting barrage of anti-union propaganda.  After being hit with all kinds of threats, pleas, intimidation and misleading data, by the time the actual vote took place, these workers are understandably shaken up and confused.

Sometimes these “indoctrination sessions” are done with home-grown talent, sometimes they are farmed out to consulting firms that specialize in running scare campaigns.  In either case, these anti-union drives can be brutal.  With the stakes this high, companies don’t pull their punches.  Passage of the EFCA would make the whole procedure simpler and, from labor’s vantage, eminently fairer.

Despite the EFCA having the nominal support of President Obama, it’s been speculated that sponsors of the bill—under pressure from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who worries that conservative/moderate Democrats voting for it would jeopardize their re-elections in 2010—are open to anything that would avoid what is expected to be a savagely contentious legislative battle.

It goes without saying that House and Senate Republicans, in concert with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, are vehemently opposed to the bill.  Indeed, its opponents have mounted a comprehensive and well-financed campaign against its passage.  The Chamber of Commerce and other lobbying groups have already raised tens of millions of dollars in an effort to see it killed.

The problem with the rumored compromise, at least from the standpoint of its congressional sponsors and the country’s labor leaders—who haven’t been this excited by a piece of legislation since the 1930s—is that the language changes being discussed appear to neutralize much of the bill’s original sizzle.

To the extent that the EFCA was supposed to reflect the will of a majority of the workers by making it easier to join a union, as well as prevent the company from stalling or playing games at the bargaining table during the newly installed union’s first contract negotiations, this proposed “compromise,” if accurately reported, more or less guts the bill.

While the discussions initiated by Costco, et al, are still in the “informal” stages, tentative proposals have been made.  Among them:  the 50 per cent  card check would be raised to 70 per cent , and the mandatory 120-day time period (after which an arbitrator would be empowered to set the actual terms of the contract) would be removed entirely, allowing management to continue to engage in the same devious tactics that led to these restrictions being proposed in the first place.

Here’s the agonizing part.  Assuming that the details of any eventual compromise are close to those being leaked, organized labor and the bill’s Democratic sponsors are going to be faced with the time-honored Principle vs. Pragmatism dilemma.

Do they stubbornly resist any attempt to dilute what they consider a fair and much needed proposal—while acknowledging that it stands a good chance of being defeated—or do they lower their standards, agree to the compromise, spin it as “the best deal they could get,” and begin plans to build on it for the future?

Getting 70 per cent  agreement on anything is difficult, and labor knows it.  Although Obama’s victory over McCain has been portrayed as “decisive,” he got slightly less than 53 per cent  of the popular vote.  And in his historic 1984 “landslide” defeat of Walter Mondale, Ronald Reagan fell short of 60 per cent .  So anything meaningful (including card check) that can pull 70 per cent  approval is a major achievement.  And labor knows it.

But even if the proposed compromises were somehow made palatable to EFCA’s sponsors, another problem looms.  There’s a competing “coalition” out there—composed of a prominent anti-labor lobbying group (the National Right to Work Committee) and, literally, thousands of smaller, non-union businesses—and this coalition is terrified that Big Business and Big Labor will come to some sort of accommodation.

Despite the prospect of key provisions being removed from EFCA, this coalition strongly objects to making card check (even with the 70 per cent  minimum) the law of the land.  Because they’ve had so much success deflecting union drives in the past, they don’t want anything short of a full-blown NLRB election to be used.  And they are pleading their case to congressional Republicans.

This EFCA issue is still very much up in the air.  It could go to a straight “up or down” vote in its present form.  It could go to a “brokered” vote, after being properly trimmed down and de-fanged.  Or it could be significantly diluted and still face substantial opposition.

In any event, because this bill must be voted on in April, what happens during the next week or two is going to be critical.  One hopes that—win or lose—labor will resist the temptation to settle for crumbs instead of a full slice of the cake.  After all, haven’t they been doing that for 70 years?

DAVID MACARAY, a Los Angeles playwright (“Borneo Bob,” “Larva Boy”) and writer, was a former labor union rep.  He can be reached at dmacaray@earthlink.net



David Macaray is a playwright and author. His newest book is “Nightshift: 270 Factory Stories.” He can be reached at dmacaray@gmail.com

October 13, 2015
Jeremy Malcolm
All Rights Reserved: Now We Know the Final TTP is Everything We Feared
Paul Craig Roberts
Recognizing Neocon Failure: Has Obama Finally Come to His Senses?
Theodoros Papadopoulos
The EU Has Lost the Plot in Ukraine
Roger Annis
Ukraine Threatened by Government Negligence Over Polio
Matthew Stanton
The Vapid Vote
Louisa Willcox
Tracking the Grizzly’s Number One Killer
Binoy Kampmark
Assange and the Village Gossipers
Robert Koehler
Why Bombing a Hospital Is a War Crime
Jon Flanders
Railroad Workers Fight Proposed Job Consolidation
Mel Gurtov
Manipulating Reality: Facebook Is Listening to You
Mark Hand
Passion and Pain: Photographer Trains Human Trafficking Survivors
October 12, 2015
Ralph Nader
Imperial Failure: Lessons From Afghanistan and Iraq
Ishmael Reed
Want a Renewal? Rid Your City of Blacks
Thomas S. Harrington
US Caught Faking It in Syria
Victor Grossman
Scenes From a Wonderful Parade Against the TPP
Luciana Bohne
Where Are You When We Need You, Jean-Paul Sartre?
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
The US Way of War: From Columbus to Kunduz
Paul Craig Roberts
A Decisive Shift in the Balance of Power
Justus Links
Turkey’s Tiananmen in Context
Ray McGovern
Faux Neutrality: How CNN Shapes Political Debate
William Manson
Things R Us: How Venture Capitalists Feed the Fetishism of Technology
Norman Pollack
The “Apologies”: A Note On Usage
Steve Horn
Cops Called on Reporter Who Asked About Climate at Oil & Gas Convention
Javan Briggs
The Browning of California: the Water is Ours!
Dave Randle
The BBC and the Licence Fee
Andrew Stewart
Elvis Has Left the Building: a Reply to Slavoj Žižek
Nicolás Cabrera
Resisting Columbus: the Movement to Change October 12th Holiday is Rooted in History
Weekend Edition
October 9-11, 2015
David Price – Roberto J. González
The Use and Abuse of Culture (and Children): The Human Terrain System’s Rationalization of Pedophilia in Afghanistan
Mike Whitney
Putin’s “Endgame” in Syria
Jason Hribal
The Tilikum Effect and the Downfall of SeaWorld
Gary Leupp
The Six Most Disastrous Interventions of the 21st Century
Andrew Levine
In Syria, Obama is Playing a Losing Game
Louis Proyect
The End of Academic Freedom in America: the Case of Steven Salaita
Rob Urie
Democrats, Neoliberalism and the TPP
Ismael Hossein-Zadeh
The Bully Recalibrates: U.S. Signals Policy Shift in Syria
Brian Cloughley
Hospital Slaughter and the US/NATO Propaganda Machine
Paul Street
Hope in Abandonment: Cuba, Detroit, and Earth-Scientific Socialism
John Walsh
For Vietnam: Artemisinin From China, Agent Orange From America
Hadi Kobaysi
How The US Uses (Takfiri) Extremists
John Wight
No Moral High Ground for the West on Syria
Robert Fantina
Canadian Universities vs. Israeli Apartheid
Conn Hallinan
Portugal: Europe’s Left Batting 1000
John Feffer
Mouths Wide Shut: Obama’s War on Whistleblowers
Paul Craig Roberts
The Impulsiveness of US Power
Ron Jacobs
The Murderer as American Hero