ABQJOURNAL OPINION/GUEST_COLUMNS: Labor Bill Would Protect Workers

Sunday, August 16, 2009

Labor Bill Would Protect Workers

By Cameron Duncan
National Labor College
          The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) is one of the most controversial measures Congress faces this year. The bill — first introduced in the Senate by Ted Kennedy and co-sponsored by then-Senators Barack Obama and Joe Biden — would make it easier for workers to join unions and would tighten penalties for employers who try to stop them.
        The economic crisis and rising unemployment have given rise to intense emotions, but our focus on banks and bonuses obscures a critical aspect of this crisis: the role of the shrinking middle class and the declining power of unions to transfer some of business profit to working people. The EFCA, which will be debated soon in the Senate, would help reverse the decline of middle income families by making it easier for workers to form a union.
        The Wagner Act of 1935 established the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The law allowed workers to petition for a union election or to win union bargaining rights when a majority signed authorization cards. The courts have weakened that last right, and the government has failed to enforce it.
        Workers organizing today are often fired, held in captive audience meetings or otherwise intimidated by their employer. Before the Wagner Act, most working people lacked basic citizenship rights at work. That is true again today, as polls show that more than half of U.S. workers — about 60 million — say they would join a union right now if they could.
        Workers in New Mexico are not immune to employer intimidation on the job. Two years ago, two-thirds of the employees at Alta Vista Regional Hospital in Las Vegas voted in favor of joining District 1199 of the National Union of Hospital Employees. The hospital objected to the election over some of the procedures, contending that it started a minute late and that the composition of the bargaining unit was incorrect.
        The NLRB overruled the objections six months later. Although District 1199 has been certified as the legitimate representative of the workers, the hospital has refused to negotiate with the employees and their union since that time.
        District 1199 has also organized workers at St. Catherine's Nursing Center in Albuquerque. According to union organizer Henry Santana, in April the union signed up more than 50 percent of the employees in favor of holding an election. On the day the Nursing Center learned of the organizing drive, they fired three employees. "As we collected signatures, the administration began to change work schedules and threaten layoffs," said Santana. "The day before the election, they told workers that if they voted in a union, they would all lose their jobs."
        In spite of this intimidation, the vote on June 19 was 29-29, with one additional contested ballot. The NLRB said there were two options: a hearing on the contested ballot, or another election. St. Catherine's favored another election and proceeded to fire six more leaders of the organizing drive. That's illegal.
        "We said, no way could we have a fair election after the firings," said Santana. "The employees are frightened and afraid to speak out. This has been a horrible experience for them and for their patients. This election was about work schedules, safe staffing ratios and quality health care. We're expecting an NLRB hearing on the contested ballot on July 28."
        The EFCA would correct the injustice in these two cases by providing penalties for company threats or coercion of employees who seek to join a union. The bill would also give workers the right to choose either majority sign-up or a government-run election if they wish to join a union and would refer deadlocked negotiations for a first contract to an independent mediator. Under current conditions even if they are forced to recognize a union, companies simply go through the motions of bargaining and, in 30 percent of the cases, never sign a contract.
        The bill now has 227 sponsors in the House and 41 in the Senate, mostly Democrats but including some Republicans. Sen. Tom Udall is a sponsor, but Sen. Jeff Bingaman has not committed himself. Those of us who support the EFCA want to see workers protected from illegal employer behavior, as our law always intended. That will help even a playing field that has for too long tilted toward employers. And in the long run it will strengthen our democracy and economy.
        Cameron Duncan teaches labor studies at the National Labor College. Dr. Duncan, a former chief economist for the U.S.House of Representatives Committee on Small Business, lives in Santa Fe.

You also can send comments via our comment form