Secret Ballot Watch

Editorial pages all across the country continue to lash out against the anti-worker card check plan, citing local examples of why the bill would be bad for workers and bad for the economy.

The bill would replace federally-supervised secret ballot elections with a public sign-up process that subjects workers to public scrutiny and pressure in the formation of a union. Equally troubling, the bill would empower federal bureaucrats to unilaterally impose contracts on workers and businesses, giving neither side a voice.

Cincinnati Enquirer columnist Peter Bronson highlighted the bill’s flaws in a column that appeared last week. 

---

“When union organizers started pestering them at home after work, Cintas workers in Pennsylvania went to court. Five years later, the Supreme Court has announced that the workers won $5 million.

“The union invaded their privacy by illegally using license plates to track them down. It was part of Unite Here's attempt to unionize Cintas - and it's just a taste of what non-union workers will face if the Senate passes ‘card check,’ the Employee Free Choice Act. …

“For now, signing a union card is just the first step. If enough cards are signed, an election is held with secret ballots. If the majority votes yes, the union wins.

“But card check allows no secret ballot. Signing a card is the first and last step. As soon as 51 percent can be pestered, intimidated or paid to sign cards, the union is certified.”

Bronson, “'Free Choice Act' removes workers' choices,” Cincinnati Enquirer, 04.16.09 

---

The debate over card check is not about workers’ right to form a union. It’s about their right to make that decision freely and privately, without fear of intimidation, coercion, or retribution from either unions or management. By taking away the secret ballot, card check gives workers anything but the free choice they deserve.

# # #