FHCA Opposes the Employee Free Choice Act (Card Check)

Oppose the Card Check Bill and Protect Workers� Rights during Unionization Process

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), otherwise known as the Card Check bill, would eliminate secret ballot union elections and replace them with a process that requires only employee signature cards and a simple majority vote to authorize union representation in your building. Under Card Check, once a simple majority vote is achieved, a business owner would have 120 days to agree to a contract with the union or a government-appointed arbitrator would impose a binding contract with the union. The legislation also dramatically strengthens penalties against employers - not unions - for alleged unfair labor practices during a union�s card signing campaign, as well as during negotiations, mediation, or arbitration, even when the employer is entirely unaware of any misconduct.

Read more about EFCA - Card Check in the American Health Care's Issues Brief.

Download an educational tool kit that includes comprehensive information, background and recommendations on how you can take action on this issue.

Read more about EFCA - Card Check in FHCA labor relations consultant, Mike Miller's, November 2008 Pulse article.

Florida Senator Bill Nelson (D) is sponsoring EFCA (s.1041). FHCA is asking members to contact him and your Florida Congressman to oppose the bill. Below is information regarding our position on this issue.

Why we oppose Card Check:

• The provisions of the Employee Free Choice Act will inhibit economic growth/recovery and are anti-worker and anti-employer.
• This legislation will eliminate a worker's existing right to a federally-supervised secret ballot when deciding whether to join a union and replace it with the very public card check system.
• The Card Check bill will require binding arbitration to determine the terms of a contract when an employer and union are unable to reach an agreement within 90 days. This mandate could discourage contract negotiations because both parties will be less likely to offer early compromises for fear of prejudicing their respective positions during arbitration. Employees also lose the right to ratify the final contract.
• Existing law does not need to be changed. Why not? The existing National Labor Relations Board procedures for private ballot elections protects both employees and employers. Indeed, unions are not currently disadvantaged, given that in the first two quarters of 2008, they won 67 percent or two out of every three elections.

For more information, contact Peggy Rigsby at FHCA at (800) 771-3422 or via e-mail at prigsby@fhca.org.