Lawmakers May Be Close to Compromise On 'Card Check' Bill

Lawmakers May Be Close to Compromise On ‘Card Check’ Bill

Karoun Demirjian

June 10, 2009

Congressional Quarterly

After weeks of negotiations, a small working group of senators may be nearing compromise on a new framework to address unionization, known better as the controversial “card check” bill.

Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, has been meeting chiefly with Arlen Specter, D-Pa., and Mark Pryor, D-Ark., to hash out the terms of a compromise that could bring 60 senators on board — a cloture-proof majority that is likely to rest entirely on Democrats’ votes. Meetings have been taking place on a “near daily” basis, according to a spokeswoman for Harkin, with another scheduled for Wednesday.

Though senators have generally remained tight-lipped about their progress, Specter recently broke that mold, telling a Pennsylvania state Democratic party conference last weekend that they would be pleased with his eventual vote on the card check bill (S 560, HR 1409).

Senators and their staffs say that should not lead anyone to think that the negotiators have reached a breakthrough yet, or that they are ready to circulate a bill.

But Specter’s bargaining position has always been something of a litmus test for the viability of the bill. Specter has criticized the bill’s provisions that favor union organization by majority sign-up — the “card check” procedure, which can be used instead of a secret ballot for elections — as well as the provision of the original bill that requires binding first-contract arbitration in cases where new unions are unable to conclude a contract with their employers in the first 120 days of negotiations. Despite this long-held stance, he voted in favor of cloture on a similar bill last Congress — a gesture that unions officials and Democrats in Pennsylvania are pressuring Specter to repeat.

Union officials familiar with the negotiations have said that while the “card check” provisions of the bill are likely to be altered, it appears that a binding arbitration time limit will still be part of the final product.

Specter isn’t the only challenge Democrats face in trying to craft a 60-vote majority. While many Democrats who have refrained from lending their support to the measure are floating alternatives — Dianne Feinstein of California, for instance, has proposed a majority sign-up by mail option that would keep the tallying free from union leaders’ influence — several conservative Democrats, such as Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, have flatly stated their opposition to any bill resembling the card check proposal.

For their part, business lobbyists have been keeping up the pressure on conservative Democrats to hold the line.

“Facts do matter. The more people learn about [the legislation], the less they like it,” said Randy Johnson, vice president with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

While leaders have no plans to circulate language in the days ahead, legislative hurdles do not appear to be the biggest area of concern for Democratic leaders.

“These negotiations have been tense. There are ongoing meetings, but nothing is going to come out until the Minnesota case is resolved,” said Harkin, referring to the seven-month dispute over last November’s Senate election in Minnesota between Democrat Al Franken and Republican Norm Coleman. “I really had planned on doing this this month, but without Mr. Franken, it makes it pretty tough.”

Harkin is counting his majority so carefully that even the absences of Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., and Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., have him concerned. He said he is now hoping to bring the bill to the floor in July.

MS/NBC Sees Unions Gaining Power, Even As One Senator Drops Off

The EFCA, the so called “Employee Free Choice Act” which actually takes away employees free choice made in privacy via a secret ballot, substituting a “Card Check” provision allowing a union to form once they harass enough people into signing a card.

The battles in Congress are returning, the Unions feel they contributed heavily to the success of the Democrats in the last election and they expect pay-back!

Last time around Specter (D-PA) was a republican and voted against EFCA, now he is a Democrat but will he stick to his principles or go with his new Leaders? Well it appears Feinstein (D-CA) may be backing away from the big unions! http://www.hometownstation.com/local-news/employee-free-choice-2009-06-03-09-45.html

Here’s how the talking heads at MSNBC see the Corporations vs. Union Battles shaping up. The Government is now firmly on the Unions side, with the Auto Bailout deals meant to appease the Unions. Don’t believe it, then what exactly did the $50 Billion do for GMC and Chrysler as they each ended up in Bankruptcy anyways?

YOU TUBE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjR-kSQzrcU

The power of money over Democracy is clearly evident. The people of the USA have dropped out of unions at an alarming rate yet the Democrats are beholden to the Unions for their elections.

My, what gobs of money can buy... in the USA a Presidency!

################################################################

Feinstein Pulls Support For Union Legislation

Jon Dell

June 3, 2009

KHTS-AM

Employee Free Choice Act loses key ally in California Senator.

In a major turn of events, a once powerful ally of pending union legislation has decided to back away.

The Employee Free Choice Act is circling Washington D.C. as we speak, and it aims to change the rules for employees forming a union.

Currently, if a majority of employees wish to form a union, a secret ballot is then set up, preceded by 39 days for both unions and businesses to plead their case.

Under the Employee Free Choice Act, unions could automatically be formed if a majority of employees simply sign a card expressing their desire to unionize. This can be done at any time, and does not require a secret ballot process.

A delegation from the Santa Clarita Valley Chamber of Commerce, joined by similar groups from around the country, is in Washington to have meetings to express their opposition to the bill. At around 12:00 eastern time this afternoon, the group met with Senator Diane Feinstein.

Feinstein, a major proponent of the Employee Free Choice Act, broke national news when she told the local delegation that she is withdrawing her support.

"She will not vote for the bill, and she will not support any modification allowing the process to bypass secret ballots, and she believes that now is not the right time for this type of legislation given the downturn in the economy," said John Shaffery, a local lawyer and vice president for the SCV Chamber Board of Directors, who was in the meeting.

The announcement came as a complete surprise to the group.

“We’re still catching our breath,” Shaffery continued. “This is truly unexpected given that Senator Feinstein was the key senator that we were here to meet with today.”

The group was recognized by Senator Feinstein, who appeared at an event in Santa Clarita last October.

Shaffery is joined in Washington D.C. by Chamber CEO Larry Mankin, SCV Bank Vice President Chris Hough, Chris Angelo with Stay Green Inc., and Valencia Acura owner Don Fleming.

Specifics on Employee Free Choice Act:

It allows for employees to unionize if more than 50% of them publicly sign a card in favor of doing so. Current law forces a private election within 39 days if 1/3 of the total employees express interest. Then, within that time frame both companies and union representatives get to plead their case to the employees.

If the union and company cannot agree on a contract, it forces a federal arbitrator to come in and set a two-year agreement, without any appeals.

It sets penalties for companies if they are unfair during the union organizing process; however it sets no such penalties on unions.

Our Congressman Buck McKeon has been a firm opponent of the legislation since its inception.

“The American economy is in real trouble. Americans are losing their jobs and their homes. The notion that Congress would take up an anti-worker, special interest payback like this one – particularly at a time like this, with the economic challenges we face – is unconscionable,” said McKeon. “The Employee Free Choice Act is an affront to basic democratic rights and it must be defeated.”

##############

MSNBC Pundits

http://mms.tveyes.com/transcript.asp?PlayClip=FALSE&DTSearch=TRUE&DateTime=6%2F3%2F2009+7%3A49%3A26+AM&market=m1&StationID=205

JIM CRAMER: turn arounds are hard. how about toyota buying up the companies they can in the world which they are a battery business. they are going to be a battery business. that's a forward way to look at things. it's going to be battery operated. every time a copper mine comes up for sale, other than the ones the mexicans bought, the toyota companies are buying it.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: you're saying this $50 billion bailout is nothing more than an insurance policy for politicians who don't want to have to run with 12% unemployment?

CRAMER: why are you so uncynical? i think the whole goal is not even political. i think it is literally a terrific way to be able to give the unions charge so know, thi to transfer capitalism away from bond holders to unions because the unions can run a better jobs program than the bond holders.

SCARBOROUGH: i keep hearing union. you hear it, too, from business people, liberals and conservatives. looks like the unions are gaining unprecedented power. not only with this administration but -- i would -- i was told by actually a democratic business person that when certain union members come into their offices, they sxrap and bow because they understand the union representative has carte blanche with this administration.

CRAMER: if they get card check, i have to tell you, i think walmart cut in half, most of the department store will suffer mightily. there's a lot -- costco trying to do a middle ground car check. car checks may be the most important issue facing american companies.

i'm with jim on this.

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: name a successful unionized company. think. you are going to go to break before you come up with one.

CRAMER: hold on a second. look for the union label and sell.

SCARBOROUGH: here's what is stunning about this. you have always been seen as, you know, a democrat. boston guy. a blue collar guy. a pro-union guy. yet, you are telling me

BARNICLE: they lost their way.

SCARBOROUGH: the unions have –

BARNICLE: they are in it for the dues.

CRAMER: you bet!

BARNICLE: rather than helping union members.

CRAMER: i ran a wildcat strike once at veterans stadium.

SCARBOROUGH: all right. i'm impressed.

POLITICO: Memo Outlines Campaign Against SEIU's Stern

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0609/Memo_outlines_campaign_against_SEIUs_Stern.html?showall

Memo Outlines Campaign Against SEIU's Stern

Ben Smith

June 1, 2009

Politico

Two memos from labor movement enemies of SEIU President Andrew Stern offer unusual insight into a concerted, ad hominem campaign against one of the country's highest-profile labor leaders.

The campaign seeks to "plant" stories in the press on the theme that "Stern is behind it all" and to "engender SEIU internal dissent," according to one memo.

The two internal memos were drafted by aides to hotel and casino workers' leader John Wilhelm, who heads UNITE HERE. The garment workers' side of that union has sought to secede and, as "Workers United," affliliate with Stern's SEIU, prompting a bitter turf battle between Stern, Wilhelm, and their respective allies.

They're a mark of the bitterness of this labor civil war, and and the vast resources being expended on it: One memo says that 20 UNITE HERE researchers are spending most of their time targeting SEIU, while another lays out a set of targets for organizers and other union staffers.

"John Wilhelm is making a lot of false allegations rather than address the real matter at hand: what is in the best interests of the working women and men who built and count on these unions," said a spokeswoman for Stern, Michelle Ringuette. "SEIU is very concerned that Wilhelm’s repeated refusal to submit to binding arbitration is resulting in workers’ contracts being left open and negotiations being disrupted."

The fight isn't one-sided: Stern's allies in the garment workers' faction also mailed a series of ad hominem attacks on local hotel workers' leaders, and the sides are skirmishing over the control locals. A spokeswoman for the hotel and casino workers' side, Pilar Weiss, said her side was only responding in kind.

"These are defensive memos," she said in an email. "If one is being raided and smeared by SEIU, you react to their actions."

Wilhelm also released a memo claiming Stern or his allies had hired a private investigator to track him; a Stern spokeswoman, Michelle Ringuette, denied Stern or his allies had hired the private eye, and said Stern and others had been out of town on the date of an alleged meeting.

The two internal UNITE HERE memos (which can be read here), dated late March, were sent by fax to a Wilhelm ally, Chris Magoulas. The first was sent by another union staffer, Paul Schwalb, while the second's cover sheet says it was drafted by a third staffer, Jim Baker.

The first memo lists actions today, and says UNITE HERE operative have "Planted several 'Stern is behind it all' stories in the press" and "encourage[d] (and started to systematically track) one-on-one communications with SEIU leaders and staff."

The memo also clearly lay's out the union's strategy: A personal assault on Stern, the high-profile SEIU chief.

Under the heading "Stern focus" the memo plans a campaign "Debunking the myth of Stern" and to "lay EFCA's fate at Andy's feet," referring to the Employee Free Choice Act, which has stalled in Congress.

(The strategy comes despite an earlier clash between Stern and Wilhelm over whether the bill should be a priority, as Stern thought, or a lesser focus, as Wilhelm argued.)

Among the memo's "key questions": "How do we best engender SEIU internal dissent?"

A second memo describes six SEIU organizing and political campaigns, from childcare workers in Massachusetts to state workers in Arizona, in which SEIU is seeking government action to help it organize groups of workers; the memo discusses options for disrupting the campaign.

A source also provided a copy of a letter from Wilhelm to employers, instructing them not to recognize the rival garment workers' union.

Biden Hopes Specter Backs Card Check Compromise

Biden told regional reporters in a telephone conference that he had not spoken with Specter about his position on the bill.

"But knowing Arlen, I believe Arlen will probably have an open mind if there's a compromise offered," Biden said. "But I don't know. That's my 34-year history of dealing with him. He's an intelligent, open-minded guy and I think he would listen to alternatives."

Biden said he remains hopeful that Congress will pass the bill, saying the White House is in "constant discussion" about it with labor and business groups.

"We are working very closely with labor, we support card check," Biden said.

+++++++++++++++

Rendell on Specter re: Card Check

EFCA Supporters No Closer To Passage Of Job-Killing Legislation

“[EFCA] is no closer to getting the 60 votes it needs to cut off a Republican filibuster than when Specter was a member of the GOP. As one senior Democratic aide noted, ‘[Specter] made it clear he still opposed the Employee Free Choice Act in his statement.’ Moreover, even if Democrats were able to bring him back into the fold, ‘you still have to deal with [Blanche] Lincoln, Diane [Feinstein] and Jim [Webb].’” (Sam Stein, “Specter's Defection Likely Doesn't Change EFCA Calculus, Dems Acknowledge,” The Huffington Post, 4/29/09)