Labor Unions' Hail Mary

With union membership hovering around 12 percent of the work force, down from over a third of the workforce in the 1950's, labor unions are looking, desparately, for any way to stop the bleeding of membership. But that 12 percent number is actually skewed heavily by public employee (that is government workers) unions. Fully 26 percent of govenrment employees are unionized. Union membership among private sector employees is a miniscule 7.4 percent. Yet, representing just over one tenth of the American workforce, big labor has major mojo in the Democratically controlled Congress.

Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) has an op-ed in the Washington Times that describes the pay-off for big labor:

Faced with this reality, union bosses have reverted to full panic mode. And after they helped usher into Congress a new Democratic majority, they see a small window of opportunity; one final, desperate attempt to stop the bleeding.

That window has taken the form of the cleverly worded Employee Free Choice Act, which strips workers of their right to a secret ballot in union recognition elections. Instead, it would force workers to submit to a "card check" — a process that places them at risk of intimidation, coercion and threats from labor bosses, all to get them to sign a card to demonstrate their "support" for unionization.

The card-check legislation is the No. 1 priority of unions — and considering the bill's quick committee action and hastily scheduled appearance on the House floor this week, Big Labor has succeeded in making it a top priority for Democrats as well. After all, Big Labor shouldn't have to wait too long for a return on their staggering investment in last year's campaign, should it?

What's truly amazing about the Big Labor and congressional Democratic push for the card check bill is the absolute hypocrisy of it all. The labor bosses behind the effort to strip workers of their rights to a private ballot in union organization elections are the very same people who have argued passionately for such rights in union decertification elections. In fact, using quite stirring language, Big Labor once told the National Labor Relations Board that the secret ballot election is a "solemn" occasion, imperative to preserving "privacy and independence."

But Big Labor doesn't have a monopoly on hypocrisy in this debate. Congressional Democrats are giving them a run for their money. Consider this: Writing to Mexican — yes, Mexican — officials in August 2001 in advance of an election between two competing labor unions in that country, 16 House Democrats — 11 of whom remain in the House and sponsor the card-check bill, including the bill's lead sponsor himself, Rep. George Miller of California — plainly stated: "We understand that the secret ballot is allowed for, but not required by Mexican labor law. We feel that the secret ballot is absolutely necessary in order to ensure workers are not intimidated into voting for a union they may otherwise not choose." Not only do Democratic card-check proponents seem to support rights for Mexican workers that they aren't even willing to protect for their own constituents, but they also have admitted that the process is deeply flawed and prone to intimidation.

Hypocrisy seems to be a theme, but Democrats have still not learned an important lesson.

While they think big labor propelled them into power last year, they have yet to realize that big labor is just a small segment of America and moves like this are all but guaranteed to generate a great deal of backlash among even union sympathizers. Open ballots lead to imtimidation, coercion and possible retaliation by unions against dissenting workers. That is the reason why America moved to an Australian ballot for its elections in the 19th Century, to protect the privacy of voter choices. Even those predisposed to supporting unions in many cases may not find that a "card check" version of voting is a good thing.

Elections are supposed to be free. This type of legislation is not free. Fortuneately, while the House may pass this bill, I don't think the Senate is going to get away with such a move.