WASHINGTON — Legislative leaders last week were reportedly discussing possible changes to the Employee Free Choice Act — specifically removing the “card check” provision that would make it easier for unions to organize — but retailers remain vehemently opposed to other aspects of the bill.
“This is a wounded tiger — you'd better watch out,” said Neil Golub, chief executive officer of Schenectady, N.Y.-based Price Chopper Supermarkets, who is spearheading the opposition to the legislation for Food Marketing Institute, Arlington, Va.
When it became clear that the original version of EFCA could not pass the Senate, even with the 60-seat Democratic majority, reports said some Senate leaders have discussed removing the so-called card-check provision, which would allow workers to organize a workplace by signing cards rather than holding a secret election.
However, retailers are strongly opposed to other aspects of the legislation, including provisions calling for a third-party arbitration panel to settle contracts. In the original bill, when a company and a union cannot come to an agreement on a first contract, the arbitration panel would impose a contract on the employer.
“Taking away the right of employees to a secret-ballot election is terrible — that's the first part of the bill that stinks,” said Golub. “The second part of the bill that stinks is mandatory arbitration. It kills collective bargaining, because once the union knows they have mandatory arbitration, they don't have to budge on anything. And the company can be subjected to costs and rules that it can't abide by.”
Allen Gross, a labor attorney with the Los Angeles-based firm of Mitchell, Silberberg and Knupp, said he has heard that legislative leaders may have discussed imposing what is called baseball-style arbitration, in which a judge decides which of two competing contract proposals to enforce.
“That does force both sides toward the middle,” he explained, because a proposal that is too far out of bounds can be discarded in favor of the other side's contract offer.
Golub noted that there has also been discussion of shortening the time frame before elections — to as little as five to 10 days.
“For a small business that has to go out and get an attorney in 10 days, that's not fair,” Golub said.
