[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 16624-16625]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                        EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE ACT

  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to cosponsor the Employee Free 
Choice Act sponsored by Senator Kennedy. Unions helped build our 
country. They have led the fight for critical worker safety and worker 
rights protections that all Americans now enjoy. They help raise wages 
for low- and middle-wage workers and can help close the gap from rising 
income inequalities.
  Being a part of a union pays off for workers. For example, union 
cashiers earn 46 percent more than nonunion cashiers. Union food 
preparation workers earn 50 percent more than nonunion food preparation 
workers. And union maids and housekeepers earn 31 percent more than 
nonunion maids and housekeepers. Overall, median weekly earnings for 
union workers are $191 higher than those of nonunion workers, and this 
difference is even more significant for minority groups.
  Union workers are also almost twice as likely to receive employer-
sponsored health benefits and more than four times more likely to have 
a secure, defined-benefit pension plan than nonunion workers.
  The rate of unionization in America is declining and with it workers' 
income. In 1973, 42.4 percent of workers in Michigan were in unions. By 
2006, that number had fallen to just 19.7 percent of workers. As union 
membership declines, so has Michigan's real median household income, 
which fell 14.9 percent between 1999 and 2005.
  The problem is not a lack of interest from workers. Fifty-three 
percent of U.S. workers state they would join a union if they could and 
62 percent believe they would be worse off if unions did not exist.
  The problem is the difficulties that are presented to those who seek 
to unionize a shop or industry. The current system does not adequately 
protect the workers that unionization campaigns are supposed to help 
and support. Workers are fired in 25 percent of private-sector union 
organizing campaigns. Seventy-eight percent of employers require that 
supervisors deliver antiunion messages to their employees. One-third of 
workers who unionize their workplace never even get a contract.
  We have a duty to make sure that workers who want to join unions and 
unionize their workplace can do so, and that's what the Employee Free 
Choice Act will do.
  The most significant provision in the bill allows for a union shop to 
be created through a process called a majority sign-up. Majority sign-
up has been used for at least the past 70 years. In 2004, for example, 
about five times as many workers joined the AFL-CIO through a majority 
sign-up than those who were able to unionize through the National Labor 
Relations Board process. A majority sign up process results in less 
employer pressure and fewer delays than NLRB elections.
  Currently, however, employers do not have to recognize employees that 
have a majority sign-up as a union, although many responsible 
companies, including Cingular and Kaiser Permanente, do. This bill 
would change that--if a majority of workers signs authorizations 
designating a union as their bargaining representative, then that union 
would be recognized as such.
  Opponents of this bill have spread a great deal of misinformation 
about this provision. Many people believe the bill would take away an 
employee's right to a ``secret ballot'' union election. That is not 
true. This bill would still allow individuals the right to an NLRB 
supervised election if at least 30 percent of employees want it. This 
bill also allows employees to form unions using another method as well.
  The Employee Free Choice Act would also establish penalties for 
companies that coerce or intimidate employees and would provide for 
mediation and binding arbitration when the employer and workers cannot 
agree on a first contract. In short, it makes needed updates to our 
labor laws to better protect workers.
  By allowing employees to form unions through a majority sign-up, we 
are supporting a worker's freedom to form a union and to bargain for 
better pay and better benefits. Experience has shown that this will be 
a good deal for the worker and a boost for America.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, since joining this body in 1993, I have 
supported a number of initiatives to help the hard working men and 
women of this country, including increasing the minimum wage, 
supporting equal pay for America's workers, and promoting better trade 
policies. One piece of legislation that would help American workers is 
the Employee Free Choice Act, EFCA, and I am proud to be an original 
cosponsor of EFCA again this Congress. I commend my colleague, the 
senior Senator from Massachusetts, Senator Kennedy, for his hard work 
on this legislation, as well as his longstanding dedication to 
improving the quality of life for America's working people.
  One of the best things we can do for American workers is to remove 
obstacles that make it harder for them to form and join unions. As many 
of my colleagues will likely point out in the

[[Page 16625]]

course of this debate, more than 60 million U.S. workers say they would 
join a union today if they could. Further, workers who belong to unions 
earn 30 percent more than nonunion workers, are 62 percent more likely 
to have employer-provided health care, and are four times more likely 
to have a pension. Better wages and better benefits help lift Americans 
out of poverty and into the middle class. Far too many Americans are 
working for wages that keep them at or below the Federal poverty line 
with little, if any, opportunity to bargain for better wages and 
benefits or advance to a better-paying position.
  The Employee Free Choice Act would address some of the inequities in 
the current system of collective bargaining in the U.S. Many critics of 
this legislation focus on the card check provision, but there is much 
more to this legislation than just the method of voting. This bill 
provides for first-contract mediation and arbitration. Importantly, if 
an agreement has not been reached after 90 days of negotiations, either 
the employer or the employees can refer the dispute to the Federal 
Mediation and Conciliation Service for mediation. Clearly, under the 
ideal negotiation this would not be necessary, but it is an important 
option for employees to have in the collective bargaining process. The 
bill also provides for stronger penalties for employer violations while 
employees are attempting to form a union. Employers who intimidate 
workers attempting to unionize should face appropriate consequences.
  While I understand that the vote on cloture on the motion to proceed 
to the Employee Free Choice Act may not be successful this week, this 
fight is far from over. Over the last 2 years, I have received over 
1,500 letters, calls, and e-mails in support of this legislation from 
my constituents, and their voices mean a great deal. I support passage 
of this legislation for the hard-working Wisconsinites who deserve 
better from us. I am disappointed that more of my colleagues have not 
joined in supporting this bill, and I hope that they will rethink their 
opposition to this bill. I will continue working to pass this important 
legislation.

                          ____________________