State Conservatives Lead The Charge In Effort To Protect Secret Union Ballots
BY SEAN HIGGINS
INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Posted 3/16/2009
While the fight over pro-union card check legislation rages on in Congress, a second front has opened up in the battle: the states.
Critics of card check are trying to get states to amend their constitutions to require secret ballots in union organizing. They've already managed to get one state, Utah, to put the proposed changes on the ballot in the 2010 election.
In most cases, card check would make union organizing easier by using what amounts to a simple petition drive to replace a federally overseen secret ballot by workers asking whether they want to join a union.
 |
Critics call it a power grab. Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, a Republican, has endorsed the anti-card check drive in his state.
"This issue is fundamental to our economic development efforts as a state and safeguards our long tradition of being a 'right to work' state," Huntsman said.
Similar efforts are being pushed in Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Missouri, Nevada, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina and South Dakota. Most are still at the preliminary stages.
The organization pushing this effort — Save Our Secret Ballot, a nonprofit group — is trying to get states to adopt the following language to their constitutions:
"The right of individuals to vote by secret ballot is fundamental. Where state or federal law requires elections for public office or public votes on initiatives or referenda, or designations or authorizations of employee representation, the right of individuals to vote by secret ballot shall be guaranteed."
Former Oklahoma Congressman Ernest Istook, another Republican, is chairman of SOS Ballot. He says the issue is too important to be left to Congress, where card check's fate lies in the hands of a few wavering senators.
"There are no permanent victories in Washington," Istook said. "We know that regardless of what happens or fails to happen in Congress this year, the labor union pressure on this is not going to go away."
His organization not only wants to "kill a bad bill," he added, "but kill a bad idea. The way you stop it from being resurrected is by creating these protections in state constitutions."
It won't be easy. As Istook concedes, the criteria for revising state constitutions vary state by state. Florida House Majority Leader Adam Hasner, a backer, is "optimistic," but said his team faces a lot of hurdles.
"It would require a three-fifths vote in the Florida Legislature in the House and the Senate, and then it would require a 60% voter approval in the November 2010 election for it to be placed in our constitution," Hasner said.
This is a new effort by card check opponents. SOS Ballot was only founded in December. Its board includes several ex-Republican lawmakers as well as members of conservative activist groups.
Fans of card check dismiss the effort. John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO, told IBD he doesn't believe that state laws — even state constitutions — can trump federal law.
"I believe this bill (the congressional card check legislation) pre-empts any state action," Sweeney said.
Some on the anti-card check side fear Sweeney might be right. A lobbyist for one group fighting against card check told IBD the state constitution changes could lose court challenges.
"We're uncertain about it," the lobbyist said. "That's why we are focusing on things at the federal level."
Istook said he is certain any legal challenge could be rebuffed. He shrugged off critics of the state approach.
"No matter what your argument is in Washington, you can always find somebody to buy into it," Istook said.
Card check is a top priority of Big Labor, which sees it as crucial to reversing a decline in membership. Only 12.4% of the total work force is unionized, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The number is even smaller for the private sector, just 7.6%.
Under labor law, union organizers must get signatures from 30% of a company's workers. The National Labor Relations Board then oversees a secret ballot election. If more than 50% of the vote is for a union, it is recognized.
Card check would change this by eliminating the NLRB election. Instead, unions would only need to get the signatures of more than half of the employees.
Critics argue that by eliminating the secret ballot, the law would make it easy for unions to coerce or trick people into signing up. Unions claim the change is needed to counter business campaigns against unionization.
The bill also would impose mandatory arbitration on labor contracts if business and labor can't come to an agreement after a union has been recognized. A federal arbitrator would then dictate contract terms. That worries Big Business, which says it would give labor an incentive not to reach a compromise.
A study by LEGC, a private consulting firm, concluded that card check would boost unionization by 5% to 10% in its first year and lift unemployment by 1.5 to 3 points.
The current jobless rate is 8.1%, a 25-year high.
Many experts say it could hit 10% by the end of 2010.
Card check passed the House in 2007, but stalled in the Senate,where it was filibustered.
Fans were hopeful they'd have better luck this time, but some who previously supported it, such as Sens. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., and Arlen Specter, R-Pa., appear to be leaning against it.
Click here for copyright permissions!
Copyright 2000-2009 Investor's Business Daily, Inc.