Face-off: How Should Workers Decide on Unionization?

Private Ballot Versus Card Check

Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (R-CA)
Ranking Member, Cmte. on Education and Labor

The right to a private ballot is the cornerstone of our democracy. For centuries, Americans-regardless of race, creed, or gender-have fought for the right to vote and the right to keep that vote to themselves.

Now, just months after a new House Majority was elected in 435 separate, secret ballot elections, it has voted to strip men and women of their right to a private ballot in the workplace. What could be more undemocratic than that?

Contrary to the implication of its title, the so-called Employee Free Choice Act would strip workers of their right to privacy in union organization elections. By doing so-and by instituting mandatory card checks-workers are robbed of the right to choose, freely and anonymously, whether to unionize. Instead, they are left wide open to coercion, pressure, and outright intimidation and threats.

The question card check supporters have never answered consistently or rationally is this: How exactly does this bill protect free choice? When you sign a card, everyone knows how you voted-and right away. Your co-workers. Your boss. The union organizers. And the union bosses.

Anyone associated with a unionization drive knows exactly how you came down on the issue. And once that vote is exposed for all the world to see, there's no turning back.

That's not free choice. That's not a concept I can support-or ever will support-as a member of Congress elected to office, ironically, thanks to the secret ballot.

Rep. George Miller (D-CA)
Chairman, Cmte. on Education and Labor

Under the Employee Free Choice Act, H.R. 800, if a majority of workers sign cards authorizing a union, then they would get a union. This majority sign-up process is already permitted under current law, but only if the employer agrees to recognize the union. I believe that the choice on whether or not to unionize belongs to employees, not employers. But I also think that majority sign-up can benefit both labor and management.

Consider, for example, Cingular Wireless and Kaiser Permanente. Both companies agreed to allow their employees to use the majority sign-up process to determine whether to form a union and pledged not to interfere with their employees' decision. As a result, workers in both companies were able to make the decision for themselves, free of intimidation or coercion. The result in both cases was a more productive, more collaborative relationship between the companies and their workers.

Agreements such as those between Cingular and the Communications Workers of America afford employers and employees common ground on which to bargain. On the contrary, the negativity and even hostility often associated with a National Labor Relations Board election process can produce lasting damage to worker morale and management-worker relations.

The Employee Free Choice Act would give workers an opportunity to choose, free of coercion or intimidation, whether or not to form unions and bargain for better wages and benefits. By doing that, the legislation would help strengthen America's middle class. That's a goal that every U.S. company ought to share.