The U.S. Chamber of Commerce strongly opposes H.R. 2474, the “Protecting the Right to Organize Act.”

Thursday, May 16, 2019 - 6:00pm

May 16, 2019


The U.S. Chamber of Commerce strongly opposes H.R. 2474, the “Protecting the Right
to Organize Act.” Members who do not cosponsor this bill will receive credit for the
Leadership component of their “How They Voted” rating.

This bill would abolish any sense of balance between union rights and employer rights in
labor organizing and negotiations by explicitly eliminating employers as a party in elections to
determine if a union would represent that employer’s workforce. Moreover, under this
legislation a secret ballot election where the employees chose not to be represented by a union
could be overturned if enough employees signed cards saying they supported that union.

H.R. 2474 would also potentially take away workers’ traditional opportunity to ratify a
first contract. If the newly recognized union and the employer cannot agree to a first contract
through negotiation and mediation, an arbitration process would result in a contract without
employees being able to vote on that contract.

This bill would also effectively repeal the Taft-Hartley Act, labor law reforms enacted in
1947 to rein in some of the most abusive union organizing tactics of that era. H.R. 2474 would
once again allow unions to engage in secondary boycotts and picketing, meaning that they could
target any employer doing business with a targeted company even if those employers have no
connection with the union. This would allow for the disruption of entire segments of the

Another key provision of the Taft-Hartley Act allowed states to pass right-to-work laws,
meaning that workers could no longer be fired for not paying union dues. Twenty-eight states
have enacted right-to-work laws. H.R. 2474 would repeal the section of the Taft-Hartley Act
allowing these laws, invalidating all states’ right-to-work laws currently in place.

Moreover, H.R. 2474 would codify the National Labor Relations Board’s unworkable
Browning-Ferris definition of joint-employer liability based on “indirect” or “potential” control
of another company’s employees. It would also codify and nationalize the strict definition of
independent contractors based on the California Supreme Court’s Dynamex decision that
threatens to make using or operating as an independent contractor extremely difficult. This court
decision is poised to seriously damage the tech sector, start-ups, and “gig” economy companies,
as well as the millions of individuals who value the independence and flexibility of working as
independent contractors. In addition, it would reinstate the “persuader” rule, which was intended

to deprive employers of legal representation during union campaigns, a rule that a court found
“defective to its core.”

H.R. 2474 would codify bad labor policy and failed efforts at reform. The Chamber
strongly urges you not to cosponsor this bill.


Neil L. Bradley