With the Minnesota Supreme Court declaring Al Franken the winner of the state's U.S. Senate race,  Democrats now enjoy a super majority of 60 votes in the Upper Chamber (assuming they have all Democrat Senators present including Senators Kennedy and Byrd who have not been casting votes for several months now due to serious illnesses).  This means that the Senate Democratic leadership may now have the ability to prevent filibusters and pass some of Organized Labor's top legislative priorities in the coming weeks.  So FMI is recommending that our members once again register your strong opposition to the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) and any alternative compromise. 

Talks of an EFCA compromise continue on Capitol Hill. Key Senate Democrats (Harkin, Brown, Carper, Pryor, Schumer and Specter) are mulling the idea of dropping the card-check provisions in EFCA and keeping the secret ballot under the condition that an election be held within five to ten days after 30 percent  of workers sign authorization cards.  In addition to quick elections, the EFCA compromise would feature binding arbitration if an employer fails to reach an agreement on a contract with a newly certified union.  Finally, the new EFCA initiative would allow union organizers access to the employer's workplace during normal business hours.  All of these provisions are unacceptable to the supermarket industry, and any compromise on EFCA would eventually morph back into the original "card check" bill prior to final passage by Congress.  So far, no formal legislative language on an EFCA compromise has been circulated. 

Bottom line, the current EFCA bill  (S. 560)  or any alternative compromise would drastically change how unions are allowed to organize workers in the United States.  FMI asks you to contact your Senators to register your opposition to this legislation or any compromise versions that continue to contain unacceptable provisions that take away worker protections. Grassroots letters to the following Senate Democrats are critically important:  Michael Bennet (CO), Thomas Carper (DE), Kent Conrad (ND), Dianne Feinstein (CA),  Kay Hagen (NC), Mary Landrieu (LA), Blanche Lincoln (AR), Ben Nelson (NE), Mark Pryor (AR), Arlen Specter (PA),  John Tester (MT), Mark Warner (VA) and Jim Webb (VA). 

There are three major problems with the current EFCA legislation.  They are as follows: 

1. The Elimination of the Secret Ballot

EFCA would essentially do away with one of the long standing principles of workplace democracy, the elimination of the secret ballot election when workers are deciding whether to form a union.  In its place, unions would collect signatures of employees.  If a majority of workers at a facility sign a card, the federal government would then certify the union.  Elimination of the secret ballot is anti-worker and invites intimidation and coercion of employees. 

2. Mandatory Binding Arbitration

Once a union is certified, the employer and the union would have only 120 days in which to reach an agreement on the terms of the contract.  If no agreement is reached within that time frame, a panel of federal government arbitrators who likely would have no understanding about running grocery stores would dictate the terms of a two-year contract including wages, work rules and benefits.  Employees would have to accept the contract as is without voting on it. 

3. Stiff Penalties on Business 

EFCA would impose harsh new penalties on business for alleged violations during the union recognition process.  Unions would not be subjected to any penalties for similar violations.  This is particularly unfair to smaller supermarket members who are not very familiar with union organizing or the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).  Under EFCA, there is no small business exemption.

There is no compromise on EFCA.  This bill cannot be made acceptable by amendments.  FMI urges you to contact your Senators now to express your opposition to a very onerous proposal.

The proposed compromise would still require employees to be subject to binding arbitration and accept an agreement put in place by federal government arbitrators that they could not vote on if an agreement is not reached within the specified time period.  Additionally, a compromise that might get 60 votes could then be modified with only 50 votes and the original bad EFCA provisions could be put back in the legislation with only 50 votes instead of the constitutional protection of 60 votes for such a significant change.