Does the Employee Free Choice Act Meet the Definitions of Free Choice?

It seems more and more that the word "freedom" is becoming dependent upon one's interpretation of that very powerful word.  Freedom is the condition of being free; The power to act or speak or think without imposed restraints.  The Employee Free Choice Act could therefore be summarized as a law that defines an employee's freedom to choose union representation or no union representation without restraint.  On first glance, titling this proposed act the Employee Free Choice Act is extremely intelligent in design.  Who in their right minds would vote against free choice?

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) of 1935 and the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 define employer and employee rights regarding the unionization of the workforce.  The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) enforces those acts, and certifies the election process of a vote for union representation.  What the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) introduced in 2005, reintroduced in 2007 and 2009, and sure to be reintroduced again in the near future, aims to do is become the most far-reaching proposal to amend federal labor laws in more than 60 years.

So is this truly a proposition on free choice? 

Currently, the method for most workers to form a union in a workplace is for at least 30% of the workers to sign a petition or authorization cards to be represented by a union.  Once that is done, the petition or authorization cards are sent to the NLRB who then verifies the signatures and orders secret ballot elections.  There is a campaign period (42 days) for employers and the union to attempt to persuade employees of their positions on unionization, and then the secret ballot is held under the supervision of the NLRB.  Over 50% vote yes, the company is unionized.  Under 50%, the company remains union-free.  Once a union is certified, there is a negotiation period for the initial contract.  There's more to it than that, but in a nutshell, this is how it is done under current law. 

The EFCA would significantly amend the NLRA.  It would abolish the right to a "secret ballot" election process by which employees decide whether or not to be represented by a union.  This effectively eliminates the campaign period in which employers and the union can attempt to persuade employees of their positions on unionization.  Under the EFCA, the employer will be required to recognize a union upon being presented with authorization cards or a petition signed by a majority of employees without the benefit of a campaign period.  Without a secret ballot process, employees lose their ability to vote anonymously, thus threatening their ability to freely choose without restraint.  It also limits the freedom of speech right for employers as is defined under the NLRA.  Finally, once a union is certified, there is a 90-day window to collectively bargain for the initial contract.  If agreement is not reached, there is a 30-day mandate to reach agreement or binding arbitration will occur.  This means an arbitrator will decide the contract parameters, not the employees nor the employer.  Does this sound like free choice?

There are certainly pros and cons to unionization, and debating those pros and cons would take me a lot longer than one blog.  However, in my opinion, there is no debate that Employee Free Choice Act is not about free choice.  It is not about freedom.  It is simply an act designed to strengthen the labor movement in America.  If you want to talk about freedom, talk to a United States soldier.