Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Stern Considers Alternatives to EFCA

By Alec MacGillis
As key senators have announced that they are not planning to support the Employee Free Choice Act, labor leaders put on a brave face, saying they have every intention of finding the needed 60 votes and that it is premature to start talking about alternatives to the bill.

But in an interview today, Andy Stern, head of the influential Service Employees International Union, stepped gently away from that unified front, raising the prospect of reforms that would overhaul union elections without giving workers the option of organizing sans secret ballot elections.

The legislation now before Congress, dubbed "card check," would let workers organize if a majority in a workplace sign pro-union cards; as it stands, employers require secret ballot elections. Unions say elections are marred by employer intimidation; employers say going with card-check -- what the unions call "majority sign up" -- would expose workers to union pressure.

Speaking to The Post's editorial board, Stern noted that there are ways to try to level the playing field in union elections without giving workers a way around the secret ballot requirement, such as shortening the window before elections are held -- thus giving employers less time to pressure workers -- and stiffening penalties for employer violations.

"We are on the hunt for a solution," he said. "No matter what you do, you have to change the election process. Whether it's majority sign up or not, workers have to have a choice about having an election. The bill has to address ... fast elections, eliminating employer behavior and what happens if there are employer violations. Regardless, that needs to be done."

He even suggested that the card-check bill had been introduced as it is in the Senate only in order to have the same language as the bill that is in the House, and that this may not have been the right way to go. "We sort of have a bill that talks a lot about majority signup and nothing about the problems of the election system," he said. "That was probably a decision made in the House to have the same bill come up and potentially pass the same bill -- which is not going to be a logical way to follow through now that we know ... what the situation is."

Stern and SEIU secretary treasurer Anna Burger said they have not given up on getting 60 votes for card-check, saying that they still hold out hope that Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the only Republican to support the bill in 2007, could yet reverse his declaration against the bill last month. "Oh sure," Burger said about the chances of Specter flipping back. "This is Arlen Specter we're talking about."

But they also acknowledged that, for now, they are having to search for their 60 votes without any help from President Obama, who has expressed support for card-check but not made it a priority.

"The President has said he has a series of things -- that we agree that he needs to get done -- which are major for every man woman and child, like health care, like the budget, like financial regulation," Stern said. "We respect that we have a job to do to line up enough votes without him. I don't think there's any question that he says there will be a vote, that this bill's time has arrived and he will do whatever is in his power to bring this home. We just aren't there yet."

Then Stern signaled one last time that if card-check does prove to be unrealistic, he believes that unions must get behind some other substantive reform, instead of waiting until 2011 in hopes of a bigger Democratic majority after the next election. "We need to get something that's significant done," he said.

By Web Politics Editor  |  April 20, 2009; 7:47 PM ET
Categories:  House of Labor  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Budget Cuts Trim a Little from the Sides
Next: POTUS Events: A Call to Service

Comments

I hope you aren't fooled by Stern's latest act. He no more wants the free choice act to pass than he is willing to let UHW members vote. As a UHW member I have seen my own employers security guards being called on employees to keep them from hearing opposing views. UHW Business Reps are asking members to rat out each or at least provide them (the Business Reps) with information that could lead to the exiled (elected stewards illegally removed) stewards being repremanded! Why don't you interview NUHW leaders?

Posted by: deniselrforjustice | April 21, 2009 11:32 PM | Report abuse

Shame on you, Washington Post, for giving Andy Stern and his hypocrisy a free pass. What's happening these days in the world of journalism? I challenge you to ask Andy Stern why it is that while he is pushing to have EFCA passed he is blocking workers in California from the freedom to choose which union will represent them? Over 100,000 workers have filed petitions in California to leave SEIU and join the more democratic, member driven, bottom-up National Union of Healthcare Workers union (NUHW). The only thing standing in the way of these worker's "Freedom of Choice" is Andy Stern and SEIU. Now, there's a story! Why don't you ask Andy Stern to explain his actions against workers freedom of choice there? Shame on you Andy Stern!!! Shame on you SEIU!!! Shame on you Washington Post!!!

Posted by: NAKTrigger | April 21, 2009 12:34 PM | Report abuse

I cannot believe the level of hypocrisy of Andy Stern, nor can I believe the complete abdication of journalistic responsibility of the Washington Post. Wouldn't it be appropriate for at least one or two members of the Post's EDITORIAL BOARD to ask how Mr. Stern can advocate for speeding up the NLRB's certification procedures, while at the same time pulling out every frivolous procedure to delay workers in his California locals from being able to vote on who should represent them? In fact, Stern's handpicked appointed trustee, David Regan, is quoted in a February 3, 2009 article as saying in response to these workers asking for a quick election, ". . . we are going to fight them every step of the way."
Further, shouldn't there at least be some skepticism of an organization that trumpeted the delay of 48,000 Kaiser-Permanente workers getting to vote on which union should represent them because of an NLRB technicality as "a victory for workers" despite over 28,000 signatures from those workers stating that they do NOT want to be in SEIU any longer? Andy Stern is the worst possible spokesperson for much needed labor reform. The recent raids on UNITE-HERE, his union busting of his staff union, UUR, and this undemocratic takeover of the country's most vibrant and progressive local union in the country, UHW, paint him to be just what he is: a bullying union thug and the corporations perfect stereotype writ large. Please do a better job in the future.

Posted by: deadseascrollsewilson | April 21, 2009 11:55 AM | Report abuse

While the rest of the country struggles to make ends meet, Stern and his "fiefdom", the SEIU, continue to stonewall on pay cuts, reduction of hours worked etc. They still have a paycheck, health care and more. Forget this act; it's isn't going to pass and good riddance.

Posted by: NotBubba | April 21, 2009 7:17 AM | Report abuse

EFCA Open Letter Republican Senators on Possible Employee Free Choice Act Compromise!

http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2009/04/37310.php


EFCA Thinking Outside of The Box to Get The Employee Free Choice Act Passed!

http://efcanow.blogspot.com/2009/03/thinking-outside-box-to-get-employee.html

Amending The Employee Free Choice Act. A Compromise Every Union Can Live With.

http://efcanow.blogspot.com/2009/01/amending-employee-free-choice-act.html

Posted by: EFCANOW | April 20, 2009 8:36 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company