Even though this past year was a disappointing one for Big Labor from the perspective that they weren’t able to get enacted into law their top priority, the job-killing Employee ‘Forced’ Choice Act, that does not mean that the small business community can rest on its laurels. The fact is after spending half a billion dollars to get pro-labor candidates including President Barack Obama elected, union bosses like Andy Stern, Richard Trumka and Gerald McEntee expect “payback”.
And that isn’t just a safe assumption. They have said as much. Shortly after the 2008 election concluded, McEntee told The Washington Times, “EFCA was ‘payback’ for the labor movement’s massive campaign effort for Mr. Obama and the Democrats.”
While there have been numerous and significant political “payback[s]” for the union bosses over the course the year, Big Labor’s top priority remains EFCA and we know they will say and do anything to receive this bailout which would hand them more political power and resources. In fact, in the first decade alone, the Employee ‘Forced’ Choice Act would ensure union heads have at least 35 billion additional dollars to reward supporters and punish opponents. But that leads one to ask, who are their opponents?
In this case, Members of Congress rejecting EFCA are opponents, as are small business owners and workers who are against the forced unionization that would result from enacting this legislation. So, elected representatives holding positions in line with the public at large, and the public itself would be targeted by the union bosses. This means, the sole beneficiaries are Big Labor and their supporters on Capitol Hill who happen to owe them.
EFCA would increase union membership by taking away workers’ fundamental rights to cast secret-ballot votes during union-organizing elections. It would make it easier for unions to get new members since this card check system would require workers’ public declaration of either support or opposition to having their workplaces unionized, thereby opening them up to coercion and intimidation.
In addition, workers would have no vote in their own negotiations, including terms for wages, benefits, or workplace conditions since the Employee ‘Forced’ Choice Act would give government bureaucrats the ability to mandate contract terms for at least two years without the consent of the employer or employee.
What’s amazing to me is that in the midst of our country’s economic turmoil, Big Labor wants to take away workers’ rights and place additional burdens on small businesses, which would lead many to close their doors or move overseas. Job growth happens by removing burdens on businesses and allowing them to develop and hire. Even worse, EFCA has been proven to cause a severe increase in unemployment with 600,000 jobs to be eliminated in the first year of passage alone and more in subsequent years.
If Congress wants to help increase jobs and assist small businesses, it should publicly announce its intention to permanently table the Employee ‘Forced’ Choice Act or any variation or so-called “compromise.”
Congress knows that a political “payback” to Big Labor will cost them and our country the ability to get out of this recession.
But we know that nothing will stop union bosses from seeking backroom deals and agreements in pursuit of this job-killing legislation.
Union leaders claim that EFCA is a natural part of any job-growth discussion, but the reality is that they have lost that argument. The Employee ‘Forced’ Choice Act is a job-killer, pure and simple. Our nation cannot afford more job loss, and thus, our country cannot afford EFCA.