Standing Fast

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA)-which was passed by the House of Representatives on March 1st is mving on to the Senate. So far the bill, introduced in the Senate by Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Ma) has 46 co-sponsors. If you are doing the math that leaves 4 Democrats who oppose the EFCA. Considering the role labor played in winning the Democrats the the Senate, you'd wonder what Democrat would have the gumption to buck the unions. Well here they are.

Nelson, Ben - (D - NE)720 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510(202) 224-6551Web Form: bennelson.senate.gov/email.htmlhttp://www.democrats.org/page/s/contact

Ok, not that surprised.

Lincoln, Blanche - (D - AR)355 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510(202) 224-4843Web Form: lincoln.senate.gov/webform.html

Pryor, Mark - (D - AR)217 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510(202) 224-2353Web Form: pryor.senate.gov/email_webform.htm

Kind of makes sense considering their state's main industry is the vanguard of union-busting. This last one really gets me though.

Salazar, Ken - (D - CO)UNITED STATES SENATE WASHINGTON DC 20510(202) 224-5852 Web Form: http://salazar.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

Considering the Democratic convention will be held in Denver you would think the Democratic leadership might want to bend some arms on this. Nearly every fraction of the Democratic party from the traditional liberals and netroot types to the DLC and Joe Lieberman back the EFCA and its inexcusable to let Salazar essentially thumb his nose at the rest of the party and labor. If you can only call one Senator make it Ken.

And you might want to give the DNC call and suggest that the Democrats pull out of Denver if Salazar votes against the right to organize.

Check out the AFL-CIO blog on how to get involved.

" give labor too much power to spring unions on employers . Employers who don't want to see their workers organize deserve a chance to make that case to employees in advance of the decision."

One might respond that the bosses have the chance everyday to let their employees know how they feel about a union. And unlike the union, the boss can make you listen to his or her opinion on unions whether you want to hear it or not. And as for "springing". The Employee Free Choice Act gives workers the right to form a union if a majority of workers sign up to join one. One would have to be an amazing organizer to pull that off in enough time so the boss would never figure out that there was an organizing drive on until he got the letter in the mail from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Warning against the dangers of giving Employees too much free choice, The Post goes on to argue that the NLRB just needs to beef up its current punishment mechanisms to make sure employers don't abuse pro-union workers. That's great if we could guarantee that we never have a conservative president again who will stack the NLRB with folks who are philosophically opposed to labor unions. According to the AFL-CIO one in five workers involved in a union organizing drive in the private sector faces illegal termination. 92% of workers in a union organizing drive will be subject to anti-union seminars; 78% will have one-on meetings with the supervisor. And unlike the abtract workplace of the Post these supervisors aren't engaging in a macroeconmic discussion of the role of unions under capitalism. The NLRB isn't exactly dragging these employers to jail for this. The Employee Free Choice guarantees workers in the workplace one of our core democratic rights, the freedom of association; a right that even the Post admits is not always protected under current labor law.

As much as the Post tries to make me feel the bosses pain, I'm not convinced that they will get those Congressmen who voted for the EFCA too worried about stepping on the rights of anti-union bosses. There is a big difference between talking about democratic rights in the workplace and actually setting up mechanisms to gurantee it. Congress took a a big step towards the latter last week.