|
Study finds U.S. labor law fails to meet democratic standards in elections for union representation
|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 07, 2005
|
CONTACT:
Kimberly Freeman
202-822-2127 x111
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
|
WASHINGTON, DC - American Rights at Work today released "Free and Fair? How Labor Law Fails U.S. Democratic Election Standards
." The report offers a detailed analysis of how fundamental principles
governing American elections are systematically denied to those seeking
union representation at work under the current process outlined in U.S.
labor law and administered by the National Labor Relations Board.
"No political challenger could get elected under these guidelines,"
said University of Oregon Associate Professor Gordon Lafer, the
political scientist who authored the report. "The system is so corrupt
that it doesn't remotely resemble the democratic process we think of
when we use the term 'election.'"
"Free and Fair?" measures the union representation election
process against democratic election standards established by the
political philosophy and published works of the Founding Fathers, the
historical development of electoral law and jurisprudence, and current
statutes and regulations that define "free and fair" elections. The
report reveals a series of one-sided advantages extended to employers,
as well as significant barriers imposed upon pro-union workers and
their unions. Lafer's examination concludes that:
-
Workers are restricted from openly distributing literature while employers have free reign to do so.
-
Employers deny essential employee information to thwart pro-union workers' access to their coworkers.
-
Employers and supervisors practice various forms of economic coercion
with the clear intent to grant or take away privileges based upon an
employee's position on the union.
-
Existing and excessively permissive labor
law allows employers to indefinitely delay recognition of a union
through a drawn-out appeals process.
-
There is virtually no limitation or documentation of campaign expenditures during the union recognition campaign process.
"Every high school civics student knows that elections aren't fair
without free speech, equal access to voters and the media, and freedom
from voter coercion," said former Congressman David Bonior, Board Chair
of American Rights at Work. "Gordon Lafer's research confirms that the
system for union recognition is badly broken and profoundly
undemocratic. Any reform of existing labor law must begin with this
understanding."
"Free and Fair?" is particularly relevant to the current debate
in Congress about how workers form unions. Two bills introduced this
year reflect differing opinions on whether the current system
sufficiently ensures a democratic process. The Secret Ballot
Protection Act (H.R. 874), sponsored by Congressman Charlie Norwood
(R-GA), seeks to restrict union formation exclusively to the current
system. The Employee Free Choice Act (H.R. 1696 and S. 842), sponsored
by Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), and Representatives Peter King (R-NY)
and George Miller (D-CA), would provide alternatives that guarantee
that workers can exercise their democratic rights to form unions and
successfully negotiate a contract with their employers.
"Free and Fair? How Labor Law Fails U.S. Democratic Election
Standards," is the first in a series of reports commissioned by
American Rights at Work that will spotlight the widespread deficiencies
of present-day labor law.
For a copy of the complete report please click here.
|