Official Bill Info

• Latest Action: Mar 10, 2009 Introduced in Senate

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know the most recent action for this bill is as follows: "Introduced in Senate" on Mar 10, 2009
• Committee Assignment: Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  This bill has been assigned to the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee.

Bill Statistics on OpenCongress

Contribution Data

OpenCongress Bill Summary

• This bill (aka "card check") would change the rules governing the formation of unions, the way first contracts between unions and employers are negotiated, and how employees' rights are enforced. Under the bill, workers would be able to decide whether to hold a secret ballot vote on union formation after a majority of employees have signed union authorization cards, or to have the union certified based on the cards alone. Under the current rules, employers have the power to make that decision. The bill also designates a time line for first contracts to be drawn up between unions and employees and stipulates that if no deal is reached within 120 days, an arbitration panel will render a decision that will be binding for two years. Finally, it would increase the fines employers must pay if found guilty of violating their employees' right to unionize. This bill is organized labor's number one legislative priority, and it is vigorously opposed by the business lobby. Democratic leader are expected to bring it to a vote in the Senate sometime this summer. The big question regarding its passage is whether or not the Democrats can find 60 votes in favor of breaking an inevitable Republican filibuster. The House version is H.R. 1490.

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  Here's a summary from OpenCongress.org: This bill (aka "card check") would change the rules governing the formation of unions, the way first contracts between unions and employers are negotiated, and how employees' rights are enforced. Under the bill, workers would be able to decide whether to hold a secret ballot vote on union formation after a majority of employees have signed union authorization cards, or to have the union certified based on the cards alone. Under the current rules, employers have the power to make that decision. The bill also designates a time line for first contracts to be drawn up between unions and employees and stipulates that if no deal is reached within 120 days, an arbitration panel will render a decision that will be binding for two years. Finally, it would increase the fines employers must pay if found guilty of violating their employees' right to unionize. This bill is organized labor's number one legislative priority, and it is vigorously opposed by the business lobby. Democratic leader are expected to bring it to a vote in the Senate sometime this summer. The big question regarding its passage is whether or not the Democrats can find 60 votes in favor of breaking an inevitable Republican filibuster. The House version is H.R. 1490.

Supporting Organizations

• AFL-CIO

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization AFL-CIO supports S.560
• American Federation of Government Employees

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization American Federation of Government Employees supports S.560
• American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees supports S.560
• American Federation of Teachers

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization American Federation of Teachers supports S.560
• American Postal Workers Union

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization American Postal Workers Union supports S.560
• American Public Health Association

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization American Public Health Association supports S.560
• American Rights at Work

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization American Rights at Work supports S.560
• Catholic Scholars for Worker Justice

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Catholic Scholars for Worker Justice supports S.560
• Catholics United

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Catholics United supports S.560
• Communication Workers of America

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Communication Workers of America supports S.560
• Democratic National Committee

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Democratic National Committee supports S.560
• Economic Policy Institute

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Economic Policy Institute supports S.560
• International Brotherhood of Teamsters

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization International Brotherhood of Teamsters supports S.560
• Jobs with Justice

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Jobs with Justice supports S.560
• National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization National Association for the Advancement of Colored People supports S.560
• National Association of Letter Carriers

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization National Association of Letter Carriers supports S.560
• Pax Christi USA

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Pax Christi USA supports S.560
• Service Employees International Union

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Service Employees International Union supports S.560
• United Auto Workers (UAW)

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization United Auto Workers (UAW) supports S.560
• United Food and Commercial Workers International Union

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization United Food and Commercial Workers International Union supports S.560
• United Mine Workers of America

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization United Mine Workers of America supports S.560
• United Steelworkers

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization United Steelworkers supports S.560
• International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers supports S.560

Opposing Organizations

• American Apparel and Footwear Association

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization American Apparel and Footwear Association opposes S.560
• American Frozen Food Institute

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization American Frozen Food Institute opposes S.560
• American Health Care Association

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization American Health Care Association opposes S.560
• American Hospital Association

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization American Hospital Association opposes S.560
• American Hotel and Lodging Association

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization American Hotel and Lodging Association opposes S.560
• American Meat Institute

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization American Meat Institute opposes S.560
• Americans for Tax Reform

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Americans for Tax Reform opposes S.560
• Associated Builders and Contractors

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Associated Builders and Contractors opposes S.560
• Coalition for a Democratic Workplace

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Coalition for a Democratic Workplace opposes S.560
• Heritage Foundation

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Heritage Foundation opposes S.560
• Home Depot

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Home Depot opposes S.560
• National Association of Manufacturers

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization National Association of Manufacturers opposes S.560
• National Electrical Manufacturers Association

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization National Electrical Manufacturers Association opposes S.560
• National Grocers Association

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization National Grocers Association opposes S.560
• National Mining Association

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization National Mining Association opposes S.560
• National Petrochemical and Refiners Association

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization National Petrochemical and Refiners Association opposes S.560
• National Stone, Sand, and Gravel Association

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization National Stone, Sand, and Gravel Association opposes S.560
• Real Estate Roundtable

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization Real Estate Roundtable opposes S.560
• U.S. Chamber of Commerce

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposes S.560
• citi bank

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  I know that the organization citi bank opposes S.560

Most-commented sections of the bill text

• (a) In General- Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 159(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following: (2 comments, Link )

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  specifically, this section of the legislation: "(a) In General- Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 159(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following:",
• (1) BACKPAY- Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 160(c)) is amended by striking ‘And provided further,’ and inserting ‘Provided further, That if the Board finds that an employer has discriminated against an employee in violation of subsection (a)(3) of section 8 while employees of the employer were seeking representation by a labor organization, or during the period after a labor organization was recognized as a representative defined in subsection (a) of section 9 until the first collective bargaining contract was entered into between the employer and the representative, the Board in such order shall award the employee back pay and, in addition, 2 times that amount as liquidated damages: Provided further,’. (2 comments, Link )

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  specifically, this section of the legislation: "(1) BACKPAY- Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 160(c)) is amended by striking ‘And provided further,’ and inserting ‘Provided further, That if the Board finds that an employer has discriminated against an employee in violation of subsection (a)(3) of section 8 while employees of the employer were seeking representation by a labor organization, or during the period after a labor organization was recognized as a representative defined in subsection (a) of section 9 until the first collective bargaining contract was entered into between the employer and the representative, the Board in such order shall award the employee back pay and, in addition, 2 times that amount as liquidated damages: Provided further,’.",
• (1) IN GENERAL- Section 10(l) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 160(l)) is amended-- (1 comments, Link )

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  specifically, this section of the legislation: "(1) IN GENERAL- Section 10(l) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 160(l)) is amended--",
• (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 10(m) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 160(m)) is amended by inserting ‘under circumstances not subject to section 10(l)’ after ‘section 8’. (1 comments, Link )

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  specifically, this section of the legislation: "(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 10(m) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 160(m)) is amended by inserting ‘under circumstances not subject to section 10(l)’ after ‘section 8’.",
• (1) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD- Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 153(b)) is amended, in the second sentence-- (1 comments, Link )

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  specifically, this section of the legislation: "(1) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD- Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 153(b)) is amended, in the second sentence--",

Highest Rated User Comments

• On March 25, 2009, by jazz836062 - My wife is from south-east Texas, where many oil refineries are. Most of the workers on those refineries are apart of a union. One of her ex-boyfriend's father was not part of the union. When the union went on strike and the father was still going to work, the family received death threats and union strikers tried to burn down their house. Those same people would come up to your face and ask(force) you to join the union or pay the consequence. Needless to say I am against this in every: way, shape, and form. The reason for a secret ballot is so that people are not singled out and "influenced" to vote a certain way by force.

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  As noted by jazz836062, a user on OpenCongress.org, on March 25, 2009, "My wife is from south-east Texas, where many oil refineries are. Most of the workers on those refineries are apart of a union. One of her ex-boyfriend's father was not part of the union. When the union went on strike and the father was still going to work, the family received death threats and union strikers tried to burn down their house. Those same people would come up to your face and ask(force) you to join the union or pay the consequence. Needless to say I am against this in every: way, shape, and form. The reason for a secret ballot is so that people are not singled out and "influenced" to vote a certain way by force."
• On March 25, 2009, by ronbar87 - This is not an employee free choice act. It is a way for unions to take total control. It not only is taking away the choice to vote by secrete ballot, but also taking away the right of the people to not be a member if the union is voted in. My state has a right to work law that give us the right to work in a unionized company with out being a member of the union. Personally, I don't think anyone should be forced to be a member of anything they have to pay money to be a part of. And then to have the union tell them how to vote or who to vote for, to spend their due on a candidate that may not be the candidate of my choice. This is supposed to be a free country, forced unionization would take away many freedoms we now have. Supporting certain political candidates can prove to be detrimental to our rights and freedoms. Such as the way the union supported Barack Obama for president, and now everyone is concerned about our rights to own guns.

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  As noted by ronbar87, a user on OpenCongress.org, on March 25, 2009, "This is not an employee free choice act. It is a way for unions to take total control. It not only is taking away the choice to vote by secrete ballot, but also taking away the right of the people to not be a member if the union is voted in. My state has a right to work law that give us the right to work in a unionized company with out being a member of the union. Personally, I don't think anyone should be forced to be a member of anything they have to pay money to be a part of. And then to have the union tell them how to vote or who to vote for, to spend their due on a candidate that may not be the candidate of my choice. This is supposed to be a free country, forced unionization would take away many freedoms we now have. Supporting certain political candidates can prove to be detrimental to our rights and freedoms. Such as the way the union supported Barack Obama for president, and now everyone is concerned about our rights to own guns. "
• On March 12, 2009, by clintbryant - The left wants everyone to be in a union. Unions bring businesses down. See GM, Ford, Chrysler.

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  As noted by clintbryant, a user on OpenCongress.org, on March 12, 2009, "The left wants everyone to be in a union. Unions bring businesses down. See GM, Ford, Chrysler."

Highly Rated Blog Articles

• S.560: A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to ... - March 09, 2011 by opencongress.org - Official government data, breaking news and blog coverage, public comments and user community for S.560 A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to deliver a meaningful benefit and lower prescription drug prices under the Medicare program. ..

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  As noted by opencongress.org on March 09, 2011, "Official government data, breaking news and blog coverage, public comments and user community for S.560 A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to deliver a meaningful benefit and lower prescription drug prices under the Medicare program. .." (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s560/show)
• H.R.999: Medicare Prescription Drug Savings and Choice Act of 2011 ... - March 08, 2011 by opencongress.org - A bill in the U.S. Congress: To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to deliver a meaningful benefit and lower prescription drug prices under the Medicare Program. - ... Related Bills. S.560 Medicare Prescription Drug Savings and Choice Act of 2011

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  As noted by opencongress.org on March 08, 2011, "A bill in the U.S. Congress: To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to deliver a meaningful benefit and lower prescription drug prices under the Medicare Program. - ... Related Bills. S.560 Medicare Prescription Drug Savings and Choice Act of 2011" (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h999/show)
• Obama NLRB to Ignore Mid-Term Election Results; intends to ... - December 30, 2010 by The National Right to Work Committee® - “The bottom-line impact of this bureaucratic sop to Big Labor would be very similar to the impact of the mandatory 'card check' legislation, or S.560 and H.R.1409, that union lobbyists tried unsuccessfully to ram through the 2009-2010 ...

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  As noted by The National Right to Work Committee® on December 30, 2010, "“The bottom-line impact of this bureaucratic sop to Big Labor would be very similar to the impact of the mandatory 'card check' legislation, or S.560 and H.R.1409, that union lobbyists tried unsuccessfully to ram through the 2009-2010 ..." (http://www.nrtwc.org/obama-nlrb-to-ignore-mid-term-election-results-intends-to-backdoor-card-check/)

Highly Rated News Articles

• Big Labor's Chilling Alternative to Card Check - August 02, 2009 by Human Events - ... campaign to publicly oppose the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill (S. 560) or any other bill that gives union bosses more power over American workers. ...

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  As noted by Human Events on August 02, 2009, "... campaign to publicly oppose the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill (S. 560) or any other bill that gives union bosses more power over American workers. ..." (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32954)
• - July 20, 2009 by Hotel Interactive, Inc. - Dramatic news swept across Washington late last week about a possible breakthrough on the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) (S. 560), when a half-dozen US ...

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  As noted by Hotel Interactive, Inc. on July 20, 2009, "Dramatic news swept across Washington late last week about a possible breakthrough on the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) (S. 560), when a half-dozen US ..." (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/07/23/18612226.php)
• The Employee Free Choice Act: From 2003 to Today - July 15, 2009 by Daily Kos - March 10, 2009: Employee Free Choice Act introduced in the House (as HR 1409), with 225 co-sponsors, and as S. 560 in the Senate, with 41 co-sponsors. ...

  Clicking this will add the following text:

  As noted by Daily Kos on July 15, 2009, "March 10, 2009: Employee Free Choice Act introduced in the House (as HR 1409), with 225 co-sponsors, and as S. 560 in the Senate, with 41 co-sponsors. ..." (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/16/754177/-The-Employee-Free-Choice-Act:-From-2003-to-Today)