Friday, January 02, 2009
"Card check" fever breaks in the light of day
In the category of good news for us all (with the possible exception of the union bosses who read TigerHawk), Kimberley Strassel reports that erstwhile supporters of "card check" unionization are wobbling now that there is some chance it might actually get enacted.
For those few of you who do not know, "card check" allows a union to become the collective bargaining representative of the workers in a plant without a secret ballot election. Under the Orwellian "Employee Free Choice Act," 49% of the workers in a shop would become bound if 51% of them checked cards, even if they did it in secret. No election, no debate, and no symmetry, insofar as 51% of employees could not turn the union out by checking cards. Then, if the employer and the union did not reach an agreement within 120 days the matter would go to binding arbitration and a panel of labor lawyers would dictate how the business ought to be run. The law is an outrage, and it would destroy the flexibility of American business. Do we really want any company to follow the example of the Detroit Three or Big Steel?
Fortunately, some Democratic senators are realizing that it is much easier to vote for a ridiculous law when there is no chance that it will be enacted.
Responsibility has a way of focusing the mind.
Take Mark Pryor, Democratic senator from Arkansas. In 2007, Mr. Pryor voted to move card check, Big Labor's No. 1 priority. And why not? Mr. Pryor knew the GOP would block the bill, which gets rid of secret ballots in union elections. Besides, his support helped guarantee labor wouldn't field a challenger to him in the primary.
Postelection, Mr. Pryor isn't so committed. He's indicated he wouldn't co-sponsor the legislation again. He says he'd like to find common ground between labor and business. He is telling people the bill isn't on a Senate fast-track, anyway. His business community, which has nimbly whipped up anti-card-check sentiment across his right-to-work state, is getting a more polite hearing.
It hasn't been much noticed, but the political ground is already shifting under Big Labor's card-check initiative. The unions poured unprecedented money and manpower into getting Democrats elected; their payoff was supposed to be a bill that would allow them to intimidate more workers into joining unions. The conventional wisdom was that Barack Obama and an unfettered Democratic majority would write that check, lickety-split.
Instead, union leaders now say they are being told card check won't happen soon.
With the economy in trouble, even Democratic politicians do not want to raise taxes on the "rich" or let unions take over the economy. It is almost as if they are conceding that these things would be bad for economic growth, which invites the question, why do them at all?
2 Comments:
By 
Anthony, at
Fri Jan 02, 12:02:00 PM:
I'm glad to read this, though I wouldn't write card check off yet; the Party owes too much to the likes of SEIU for it to vanish without a fight. Still, I hope these cases of cold feet spread to other parts of Obama's agenda.
By JPMcT, at
Sat Jan 03, 08:20:00 AM:
I am certain that if the Democratic electees who, to paraphrase HL Mencken,still have the "taste of boot polish" in their mouths, develop cold feet....then Mr. Soros and his ilk will provide the appropriate combustables to warm them.
