On Worker Intimidation, Gingrich Gets It Wrong
On April 30, 2009, former Speaker Newt Gingrich discussed the Employee Free Choice Act on CSPAN's Washington Journal. Attempting to show that "card check" would lead to increased intimidation by unions, Gingrich cited cases when a majority of workers have signed cards and then voted against unionization. However, Gingrich's assessment is wrong: the Employee Free Choice Act protects workers from intimidation by their employers, which can significantly influence the outcome of union elections.
Under Current Law, Employees And Businesses Are On Unequal Footing
Gingrich: "If you get 50 percent plus one to sign a card, that is the effect of an election. Well, the sociology of that kind of organizing campaign is five or six organizers can see you at work, they can see you at the grocery store, they can see you outside your home. Eventually, you get worn down. We have a lot of cases where people - as many as 70 percent have signed the cards and then when they got to a secret ballot, a majority voted 'no.'" [C-SPAN, 4/30/09]
But if workers voted against unionization after signing a card, it's probably because of employer interference and intimidation.
Union Elections Are One-Sided And Unfair. Under current law, businesses are easily able to interfere with and influence the outcome of union elections. According to the Economic Policy Institute: "Anti-union campaign managers can campaign with every worker, throughout the workplace, and around-the-clock. Pro-union employees can campaign only on break time. Management can require employees to attend 'captive audience' anti-union meetings. Pro-union workers can be forced to attend - but denied the opportunity to speak out. Management can post anti-union messages on the workplace's walls and bulletin boards. But pro-union employees cannot make use of these facilities." [Economic Policy Institute, 1/29/09]
- Employer Interference Is Real. In a 2000 study, Kate Brofenbrenner, Director of Labor Education Research at Cornell University, found that 92 percent of employers "force[d] employees to attend mandatory closed-door meetings against the union," while 78 percent "force[d] employees to attend one-on-one meetings against the union with their own supervisors." [Brofenbrenner via AFL-CIO, accessed 4/14/09]
Businesses Are Able To Intimidate And Fire Workers Who Try To Organize Unions. As Rep. George Miller (D-CA) notes: "Unlike employers, a union organizer can't fire you, cut your pay, or deny you a promotion. But, if you're an employee actively trying to organize your coworkers, you have a one in five chance of getting fired by your employer for simply exercising your democratic rights. Even a pro-business group could only find 42 cases of union deception and/or coercion in obtaining card signatures over the last 70 years. Contrast that with roughly 30,000 workers who received back pay from employers that had fired or illegally intimidated them for each year of the Bush administration. It's clear where the problem lies." [House Committee on Education and Labor, "EFCA: Fact vs. Myth," accessed 4/14/09]
- One Worker Every Eighteen Minutes Disciplined Or Fired For Union Activity. The National Labor Relations Board found that more than 29,000 people were disciplined or fired for union activity during fiscal year 2007. As noted by the Economic Policy Institute, that amounts to "one worker every 18 minutes." [NLRB Annual Report 2007, accessed 4/14/09; Economic Policy Institute, 1/29/09]
