U.S. Labor Secretary Elaine Chao Supports the Interests of Business Over the Interests of Workers
Letter to the Editor, from Ted Smukler, IWJ Director of Public Policy
excerpts published by the Chicago Tribune, March 10, 2007
On March 1 2007 the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) by a vote of 241-185. EFCA provides that if a majority of workers sign union authorization cards, their employer must recognize the union and bargain in good faith for a contract that covers wages, benefits, and working conditions. EFCA also increases penalties on employers who fire workers for supporting a union, and provides for contract arbitration to keep employers from denying workers their right to form a union.
On March 1 the Chicago Tribune published a letter to the editor from U.S Labor secretary Elaine Chao that complains that the congressional legislation (which she doesn't name) denies workers the right to a secret ballot election. Chao notes that union representation in the private sector has dropped from 35% in the 1950s to 8% today, and claims that union leaders want to tear down a pillar of democracy to regain ground. But polls by reputed pollsters including Peter Hart and Associates have indicated that a majority of American workers would choose a union today if they could. Chao neglects reality: that elections supervised by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) have been conducted at the end of campaigns of fear, harassment, and intimidation in which employers and their high priced anti-union consultants have turned workplaces into war zones.
A free election would have to include the following elements, all of which workers and unions lack under the current NLRB system:
- Equal Access to the Media. Employers have a monopoly on communications at work.
- Freedom of Speech: Speech is monitored, and wearing union buttons, passing out literature, or even telling a co-worker that you think a union is a good idea can lead to extremely negative consequences, including losing your job.
- Equal Access to Voters: Unions can only try to find workers after business hours. Employers have access eight hours and more at the job.
- Voter Coercion: Voters have no protection from coercion during an NLRB election campaign. Workers during union drives are routinely forced to go to meetings at work to learn the horrors of unions, and are forced to have one-on-one sessions with their supervisors to talk about their union allegiance.
- Timely Implementation of the Voters Will: Delays in implementing election results can take years, with legal and sometimes illegal methods used. These delays can also be used to drag out the contract bargaining impasse. An employer can claim an impasse if a contract is not reached after one year and refuse to recognize the union.
- Campaign Finance Regulation: There are no limits on what can be spent in a union representation election campaign. Employers know that they must share power and increase employee costs if the union wins, and they often spend beyond what is even rational to defeat the union.
The plain truth is that Elaine Chao and her boss, George W. Bush, do not want workers to have more power in the workplace. Without union protection, workers are paid less and profits can be driven higher. This is the freedom that Chao is really trying to protect.