Constitutional Law

Study Says Workers' Union-Organizing Efforts Increasingly Undermined

The efforts of workers to form unions are increasingly hampered by employers, a new study finds. The report by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) finds that attempts to unionize in the workplace are increasingly have been scuttled by 'illegal' firings of pro-union workers.

In 'Dropping the Ax: Illegal Firings During Union Election Campaigns, 1951-2002,' authors John Schmitt and Ben Zipperer maintain that union-supporting workers were fired in 26 percent of union election campaigns conducted between 2001-2007. The authors say that the 26 percent rate is up 'from about 16 percent in the last half of the 1990s.' Schmitt, CEPR senior economist and the report's lead author, said in a press statement that, 'Aggressive actions by employers – often including illegal firings – have significantly undermined the ability of U.S. workers to unionize their workplace. The financial penalties for illegal actions, including firing pro-union workers, are minimal, so it makes perfect sense for employers to break the law to derail union-organizing efforts.'

Brad Levinson of SEIU says CEPR's study 'points to a fairly disturbing (not to mention illegal) trend,' that should prompt lawmakers in Congress to support the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). The EFCA, which is pending in Congress and facing heated opposition from business interests, would allow the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to certify unions when a majority of employees have signed cards designating that a union represent them and provide greater protection of collective bargaining. 'If there has ever been a more startlingly-clear reason as to why the passage of the Employee Free Choice Act is vital, you can no look no further than this report,' Levinson writes. 'The bill will both give employees the free choice to join unions without management interference and strengthen penalties for employers who break the law.'

In a guest ACSBlog post, Georgetown Law Center Professor Michael H. Gottesman counters the arguments from some opponents of EFCA that, if enacted, it would prove constitutionally suspect. Gottesman's blog post is available here.

Full post as published by ACS Blog on March 05, 2009 (boomark / email).