Secret Ballot Watch

In the Golden State, card check bills have been sent to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger four times.

And four times, the “Govern-ator” has terminated them.

The latest veto came last week as Schwarzenegger said “hasta la vista, baby” to a proposal that targeted farm workers – and was very similar to the Employee Free Choice Act that’s sitting in Congress. The San Francisco Chronicle has the details here:   

---

 “Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has vetoed a union-backed bill that would have required farmers to negotiate with a labor union if a majority of their employees signed membership agreements.

“It marks the fourth time the governor has rejected requiring farm owners to abide by what are known as card-check provisions. The bill he vetoed Wednesday, SB789 by State Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, was similar to federal legislation for nonfarm employees that is the subject of an intense battle between business and labor forces in Congress. …

“Business groups counter that card check would allow unions to pressure employees in private and would effectively eliminate union elections, even though workers would retain the right to demand an election.

“‘If there's an option, the union will take the route that's easiest, the signing of those cards, and that takes away the secret-ballot election,’ said Doug Mosebar, a Santa Barbara County rancher and president of the California Farm Bureau Federation. ‘It's at the heart of the democratic process.’

“Schwarzenegger expressed a similar viewpoint in his veto message Wednesday.

“‘This process fundamentally alters an employee's right to a secret-ballot election that allows the employee to choose, in the privacy of the voting booth, whether or not to be represented,’ the governor said.”

Egelko, “Governor vetoes card check for farm workers,” San Francisco Chronicle, 09.04.09 

---

California is not the only state that has been trying to protect the secret ballot for workers. Arizona has put the issue on its 2010 ballot, and there’s an effort to do the same in Missouri.

This says a lot about the popularity of the federal Employee Free Choice Act when states – with their host of fiscal and other problems – make an effort to quash the proposal before their workers can fall victim to it. It’s clear that protecting the privacy of workers is important to state leaders – important enough for actions that range from ballot referendums to pre-emptive state laws.

Clearly, states are making a statement. The question is: Will supporters of the Employee Free Choice Act listen?

# # #