Employee Free Choice Act 

International Paper   Lexington, Kentucky

                                                                                                             

Updated : 04-22-2012

 

8-15-08 Anti Union TV Ads Researched and Exposed by Tony Bellamy

Anti-union ads aim to undermine workers' voices 

 
   
An ongoing nationwide ad campaign critical of the Employee Free Choice Act actually aims to undermine workers' rights, not support them.

More than half of U.S. workers — nearly 60 million — say they would join a union if they could. If the Employee Free Choice Act were passed, workers who want to unionize could sign a card saying as much, and a majority would then authorize the formation of a union. But not if groups like the misnamed Coalition for a Democratic Workplace and the Center for Union Facts have their way.
 
If you've seen a TV commercial with Vince Curatola (better known as Johnny "Sack" Sacramoni in the HBO hit series "The Sopranos") in which he is pretending to be a threatening and overbearing union "boss," then you've seen one of the latest efforts in a well-coordinated anti-union campaign.

Here are the facts about the Employee Free Choice Act. The act would restore workers’ freedom to form unions and bargain by:

  1. Enabling employees to form unions when a majority signs authorization cards,
  2. Strengthening penalties for companies that coerce or intimidate employees and
  3. Establishing mediation and binding arbitration when the employer and workers cannot agree on a first contract.

The Employee Free Choice Act has bipartisan backing in Congress and is supported by more than two-thirds of the American public, including a majority of Republicans.
 
Opponents of the Employee Free Choice Act describe the bill as a tool that will open the doors to union intimidation. The real aim of the ad campaign, however, is to subvert the political power of working people, who, when joined together through their chosen unions, have more of a voice and more political clout than they do individually. (A related commercial in support of Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman attacks Al Franken, the DFL candidate for U.S. Senate.)
 
Who are two of the main players?

bulletThe completely misnamed Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (made up of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, among others).
bulletA subgroup of the so-called Center for Union Facts called the Employee Freedom Action Committee.

The groups have mounted television ads, print ads, letters to the editor and much more in an effort to paint unionization as bad and employees' freedom to choose unionism as "hazardous." The so-called Employee Freedom Action Committee is a new nonprofit organization that specializes in "astro-turfing"—that is, setting up shallow state organizations that look like they are grass-roots organizations. An article in the Willamette (Oregon) Week has a great description of the committee. 
 
The group American Rights at Work notes how unbelievable it is that "business interests would suddenly care about privacy now, when corporations increasingly monitor employees' every move, including e-mail, home calls, personal belongings and even interactions outside of the workplace."

 

VOICES What are the real facts behind the Franken anti-union ads?

By Myles Spicer , Special to TC Daily Planet

August 06, 2008

We have all seen it on TV dozens of times; and it sure looks sinister. Al Franken opposing what we all hold dear: the secret ballot regarding a proposed new labor law!

Well, it finally got my attention to the point that I thought it may be well to understand what this (proposed) new law is all about; who supports and who opposes it; and how and why it is being funded.

To start with, it is best to eliminate all the subjective discussion, and go straight to the language of the bill. Here it is (at least the controversial portion), The Employee Free Choice Act:

(6) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, whenever a petition shall have been filed by an employee or group of employees or any individual or labor organization acting in their behalf alleging that a majority of employees in a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining wish to be represented by an individual or labor organization for such purposes, the Board shall investigate the petition. If the Board finds that a majority of the employees in a unit appropriate for bargaining has signed valid authorizations designating the individual or labor organization specified in the petition as their bargaining representative and that no other individual or labor organization is currently certified or recognized as the exclusive representative of any of the employees in the unit, the Board shall not direct an election but shall certify the individual or labor organization as the representative described in subsection (a).

In simple language what this means is that if a majority of the workers in a business or plant wish to have a union, they can sign a simple card called a “card check”, and they will forthwith be represented by a union, and/or an individual of their choosing. That’s it! Pure and simple.

However, here is the tricky part. If 30% or more (but not a majority) sign the card; or if there is illegal coercion in the card check vote, then there will be an election with a secret ballot! There will be an election. The ad misleads. The goal of the bill (which does have some bi-partisan support and is co-authored by Republican Peter King of New York), is to make it easier for employees to organize should they wish to. So who would oppose that?

Well, it is a little confusing — and that is likely by intention. First, there is the Coalition for A Democratic Working Place. Sounds like a worker-friendly organization, but it is far from that. It is supported and heavily funded by: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation’s most powerful business lobbying organization; the Retail Industry Leaders Association, a group whose biggest member is Wal-Mart, the poster child for low wages; and the Associated Builders and Contractors, an association of anti-union contractors who fight against workers having unions to improve their wages and safety on the job. As a side note to the U.S. Chamber, in 2006, the Chamber spent a record $72 million on lobbying. VP for labor policy Randel Johnson told The New York Times, “We’ve targeted [The Employee Free Choice Act] as our No. 1 or No. 2 priority to defeat.”

But then, there are two other (apparently) worker-friendly organizations fighting the bill – but actually only one. There is the Employee Freedom Action Committee, and Minnesotans for Employee Freedom (founded in 2008). This it where is gets a bit murky. The Employee Freedom Action Committee is based in Washington DC; and of course the Minnesota organization is based here. What seems to be the case is the Washington group sets up local or state groups to act in a variety of specific elections across the country; and Al Franken has become one of their targets. This being the case, what do we know about the Washington organization? Well, it seems to be based in the office (or is the brainchild) of Richard Berman. So, who is Richard Berman? Let me try to clarify. Berman is a noted PR, lobbying, and election specialist with strong conservative ties. He operates, or manages these (among others) front organizations out of his office:

· The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) The CCF criticizes groups who advocate regulating restaurants, meat, dairy, food processors, and alcohol. The U.S.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); Union of Concerned Scientists(UCS), and Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) · The American Beverage Institute (ABI) The ABI fights laws designed to regulate alcohol consumption, including the push to further raise existing blood-alcohol arrest thresholds · The Employees Policy Institute (EPI) The EPI is opposed to raising the minimum wage, particularly in the labor-intensive restaurant industry. It argues that increasing the minimum wage for waiters and waitresses would help drive the poor and uneducated out of the job market.

He also manages the Center for Union Facts (CUF), an organization that on February 13, 2006, ran full-page ads in major print media outlets (New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post) to blame trade unions for bankruptcies of American industries. The CUF website includes the largest online database of labor union reporting on budgets, political spending, and alleged labor criminal activity etc. It is virulently anti-union; but it is difficult to determine just who is funding this activity.

So, what is this all about? Well, a couple of things. First, the incredibly vast amounts of money lobbying groups have to influence public opinion. Secondly, the secretiveness, duplicity, and cover behind the real powers of these massive and often destructive lobbying campaigns. Thirdly, the travesties of having these third party groups operate and influence elections outside the constraints of normal election laws. And finally, something I guess we all know: don’t believe everything you see when it comes to political advertising.

 

 

In the past few weeks I have had a few comments about the Employee Free Choice Act. We, as your in-plant union committee are well aware of this act and are keeping in contact with the USW and the AFL-CIO on developments regarding this act and how it will affect this campaign.  I think some folks have been mislead to believe that the EFCA is a law when in fact it is just a bill awaiting final signature by the president. The good news is John McCain is a co-sponsor of this bill and Barack Obama has endorsed it as well.  We are very excited and optimistic about this act and will deliver more news as we have it. Below is a reprint from the AFL-CIO website about the EFCA.

Why do we need new federal legislation, the Employee Free Choice Act?

America’s working people are struggling to make ends meet, and our middle class is disappearing. The best opportunity working men and women have to get ahead is by uniting with co-workers to bargain with their employers for better wages and benefits.

But the current labor law system is broken. Corporations routinely intimidate, harass, coerce and even fire people who try to organize unions—and today’s labor law is powerless to stop them. Every day, employers deny working people the freedom to make their own choice about whether to have a union:

bulletEmployees are fired in one-quarter of private-sector union organizing campaigns;
bullet78 percent of private employers require supervisors to deliver anti-union messages to the workers whose jobs and pay they control;
bulletAnd even after workers successfully form a union, one-third of the time they are not able to get a contract.


What does the Employee Free Choice Act do?

It does three things to level the playing field for employees and employers:

  1. Strengthens penalties for companies that illegally coerce or intimidate employees in an effort to prevent them from forming a union;
  2. Brings in a neutral third party to settle a contract when a company and a newly certified union cannot agree on a contract after three months;
  3. Establishes majority sign-up, meaning that if a majority of the employees sign union authorization cards, validated by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a company must recognize the union.

What’s wrong with the current law?

The National Labor Relations Act states: “Employees shall have to the right to self organization to form, join, or assist labor organizations....” It was designed to protect employee choice on whether to form unions, but it has been turned upside down.

The current system is not like any democratic election held anywhere else in our society. Employers have turned the NLRB election process into management-controlled election process—the employer has all the power, controls the information workers can receive and routinely poisons the process by intimidating, harassing, coercing and even firing people who try to organize unions. On top of that, the law’s penalties are so insignificant that many companies treat them as just another cost of doing business. By the time employees vote in an NLRB election, if they can get to that point, a free and fair choice isn’t an option. Even in the voting location, workers do not have a free choice after being browbeaten by supervisors.


What is majority sign-up, and how does it work?

When a majority of employees votes to form a union by signing authorization cards, and those authorization cards are validated by the federal government, the employer will be legally required to recognize and bargain with the workers’ union.

Majority sign-up is not a new approach. For years, some responsible employers such as Cingular Wireless have taken a position of allowing employees to choose, by majority decision, whether to have a union. Those companies have found that majority sign-up is an effective way to allow workers the freedom to make their own decision—and it results in less hostility and polarization in the workplace
than the failed NLRB process.


Does the Employee Free Choice Act take away so-called secret ballot elections?

No. If one-third of workers want to have an NLRB election at their workplace, they can still ask the federal government to hold an election. The Employee Free Choice Act simply gives them another option—majority sign-up.

“Elections” may sound like the most democratic approach, but the NLRB process is nothing like any democratic elections in our society—presidential elections, for example—because one side has all the power. The employer controls the voters’ paychecks and livelihood, has unlimited access to speak against the union in the workplace while restricting pro-union speech and has the freedom to intimidate and coerce the voters.

Once a majority of workers indicate they want a union by signing cards, the company should not be able to drag the process out for months as they can under a management-controlled election process. The will of the majority should be recognized.

 

Does the Employee Free Choice Act silence employers or require that they remain
neutral about the union?

No. Employers are still free to express their opinion about the union as long as they do not threaten or intimidate workers.


Will employees be pressured into signing union authorization cards?

No. In fact, academic studies show that workers who organize under majority sign-up feel less pressure from co-workers to support the union than workers who organize under the NLRB election process. Workers who vote by majority sign-up also report far less pressure or coercion from management to
oppose the union than workers who go through NLRB elections.

In addition, it is illegal for anyone to coerce employees to sign a union authorization card. Any person who breaks the law will be subject to penalties under the Employee Free Choice Act.

Isn’t this law really about unions wanting to increase their membership?

This law is about restoring to working people the freedom to improve their lives through unions.

More than half of people who don’t have a union say they would join one tomorrow if given the chance. After all, people who have unions earn 30 percent more than people without unions and are much more likely to have health care and pensions. With a free choice to join unions, working people
can bargain for better wages, health care and pensions to build a better life for their families.

With the economic pressures on working people today, the freedom to pursue their dreams is crucially important.


Who supports the Employee Free Choice Act?

The Employee Free Choice Act has the support of hundreds of members of Congress of both parties, academics, historians and civil and human rights organizations such as the NAACP and Human Rights Watch, most major faith denominations and 69 percent of the American public.


Who opposes the Employee Free Choice Act?

Corporate front groups are waging a major campaign to stop the Employee Free Choice Act. They do not want workers to have the freedom to choose for themselves whether to bargain through unions for better wages, benefits and working conditions. The anti-union network includes discredited groups such as the Center for Union Facts, led by lobbyist Richard Berman, who is infamous for fighting against
drunk driving laws and consumer and health protections, and the National Right to Work Committee
and Foundation, the country’s oldest organization dedicated exclusively to destroying unions.

This network is created and managed by Marcus Bryant & Tony Bellamy   with the sole intentions of exercising their  legal right to organize for the  purpose of collective bargaining. 
Your in-plant organizing committee is: Tony Bellamy,  Roger "3 O'clock" Clark,   Dennis "The Enforcer" Brannock,   Greg Pelfrey,  Jim Rohr,  Shane Nolan,   Quentin Gay,  Tommy Wells,  Rodney Clem,  Hugh Reed, Emery "The Big E" Addison, Scotty P'Simer, And Marcus Bryant.  

We serve notice to all that, under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, we are participating in a Federally Protected Activity to organize the workforce of International Paper Lexington for the purpose of collective bargaining.   Any and all of the contents of this website is used, exclusively,  for that stated purpose. No other meaning should be assigned or implied to said content. By Federal Law, any misrepresentation or alteration of the original copyrighted material  contained in this website is forbidden.  

 

Send mail to us with questions or comments about this web site.


Copyright © 2002 International Paper Lexington Plant Union Homepage.
Last modified: April 21, 2012.