Chamber of Commerce on EFCA

Picking up on our recent discussion about EFCA, BNA's Daily Labor Report (subscription required) has an article describing the Chamber of Commerce's recent statement on the bill (hint:  they don't like it).  The Chamber is apparently starting a campaign to fight the bill--or more accurately the predicted reintroduction of the bill sometime in the future.

I've previously stated some of my misgivings with EFCA--I basically view it as an imperfect response to a big problem in organizing drives--but many of the comments by the Chamber don't pass the laugh test.  For example, it says that "[the bill] would completely change the economics of union organizing . . . [and] would make it cost effective for unions to go after Main Street businesses, small retail establishments, and industries that have never experienced unionization before."  That's necessarily bad, why?  Oh right, because your group opposes unionization in any form, so any and all attempts to guarantee employees' right to unionize--which, last I checked, is still part of the policy of the NLRA--are bad. 

And before the avalanche of union-intimidation comments is unleashed, remember that intimidation would still be unlawful under EFCA.  If you're still concerned about the possibility of union intimidation, then I'll make this proposal:  you agree to much harsher remedies for, and quicker resolution of, employer campaign misconduct and I'll agree to the same for union misconduct.

Hat Tip:  Dennis Walsh

-JH