H.R.800 - Employee Free Choice Act of 2007

To amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish an efficient system to enable employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to provide for mandatory injunctions for unfair labor practices during organizing efforts, and for other purposes. view all titles (7)

All Bill Titles

  • Popular: Card-check bill as .
  • Popular: Union Organization bill.
  • Short: Employee Free Choice Act of 2007 as passed house.
  • Popular: Card-check bill.
  • Short: Employee Free Choice Act of 2007 as reported to house.
  • Official: To amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish an efficient system to enable employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to provide for mandatory injunctions for unfair labor practices during organizing efforts, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: Employee Free Choice Act as introduced.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1-30 of 34 total comments.

  • Anonymous 07/01/2008 6:14pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    What if the federal employees are being farmed out to other agencies or NGOs? They work for one agency and are hired for that agency to work at the other agency, who’s budget and hiring are based on the other agency. Is this a separate contract for the federal employees at the other agency and would they need to organize that agency also?

  • Anonymous 09/06/2008 8:56am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Altho my inherent disposition has forever been and will be for the rights of the worker, I don’t understand this bill, it seems to fly in the face of of our electoral system:
    If we pass this bill, it would seem that our next step is to say that Presidential elections should be handled in the same way.
    Yet, aren’t we guaranteed and don’t we brag that we can vote in confidence and no one would know for whom we vote?
    <and how votes gets counted is a whole other topic of conversation, see FL & OH>

    In regards to privacy and confidentiality of voting, why is the union vs non-union different from electing the Pres of the US or the Pres of the AFL-CIO??


  • Madelynlee 11/07/2008 5:48am

    As an employee, I have seen the pressure of union workers that will say anything to get a person to sign the card. By taking away my ability to cast my vote in private, you are taking away my rights as a citizen. The safe guards are in place to ensure that we can vote for or against the union without having the fear of retribution from fellow employees or the union workers.

  • kenmoyes 12/15/2008 6:15am

    Why are the Democrats trying to take democracy out of union elections? The secret ballot insures a decision without pressure from either side. A vote for this bill is an unfettered attempt to force unions on the many workers who wish not to join a union, by eliminating the sacred secret ballot. This is an unfettered attempt to grow unions, and thus union budgets from dues, and thus union contributions to the Democrats.

    There is nothing American about this bill.

  • Anonymous 12/24/2008 12:29pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    To be perfectly fair, the bill should allow decertification by card check.

  • Comm_reply
    Anonymous 02/11/2009 8:22am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Actually, decertification by card check is already current law. I am opposed to EFCA on the same grounds as most posters here – I believe in the right to a private ballot. I do think, however, that decertification should also be by secret ballot – that’s the law I wish Democrats would write. Unfortunately, this bill is about increasing union dues revenue. And more unfortunately, Democrats owe unions big for the 2008 election so this will probably be passed.

  • Anonymous 01/15/2009 3:14am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    What about businesses? There are limited dollars available to spend on healthcare and PTO plans. As healthcare costs increase it places a larger burden on business to find affordable healthcare. In order for union employees to afford paying there 1-2% a paycheck dues and also afford healthcare employers are forced to pay a bigger portion of the employer match. This places a bigger hardship on businesses especially in todays economic climate. Union and employees want more from their employers but at the end of the day the dollar in finite. There is only so much to go around!

  • bamhr67 01/16/2009 5:19am

    Having worked for both a union and non-union shop. I truely believe that all employees should have the opportunity to vote to become a member of any union. They should be fully informed of all dues and practices, before being told to make a decision. Or being told the decision has already been made for them. Union members need to realize that all the middle and upper management take a fair share of their dues to run them. It is like paying a company to run your company and that takes away from dollars that employees could be receiving.

  • Comm_reply
    Pwdrskir 06/17/2009 9:16am

    Sounds like the mob.

  • Anonymous 01/24/2009 6:19am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    With Obama’s actions to add transparency to the government it will be interesting to see if he still supports this. There will be some airing of dirty laundry. Union organizations are huge contributors to Democrat campaigns. Will Obama want to back this when its shown he is doing it as a favor to his contributors?

  • Anonymous 01/25/2009 8:19am

    The so called secret ballot process has been successful in nearly eliminating all Unions in this Country. The process is clearly broken and has too many loop holes. Unions have been dangerously suppressed for far too long.The NLRB and the so called Labor Law has been rewritten to a form that no longer resembles it’s original intent.
    Want a Union in these United States? OK speak up and GET FIRED Immediately with no recourse…… Oh I forgot a group of workers improperly fired once and 25 years later ,most dead , they got a pitiful back pay reward?? The first day back they got fired again?

  • chairman 01/26/2009 6:55am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    So many misconceptions on this bill. The unions just want to level the playing field.
    The companies have the upper hand and the unions will equalize the power with this bill.
    Why does it take 10 years to form a union now? How can a company fire all the employees and kill the organizing drive? How can a company hold captive audience meetings and the union is barred from that? Oh yes the company is barred to, yea right.
    The company will not go broke unless they give more than they can afford. The number of strikes in this country for their contract is under 2% of all contracts.
    Come on quit crying, you have had the upper hand for years and screwed that up and now the democrats and labor are going to make things fair again.

  • Anonymous 01/26/2009 8:30pm

    Allow me to answer your questions Chairman.

    “Why does it take 10 years to form a union now?”
    Because unions are not needed. Historically it made sense. Thankfully today we have legislation in place that keeps the workplace safe, requires fair and equal pay, and makes it illegal to terminate people based on their support, thoughts, feelings, relations, beliefs towards unions. Today, its all about how much do I like my boss, or how much do I like my job. These are the only true reasons for forming a union today. I hate my boss so I am going to start a union. What is a union going to do to fix my relationship with my boss? Its not going to fix the problem, its just going to allow me to not have to deal with the problem. This is why unions are not needed. People would rather work their problems out directly than speak through a third person, judge Judy aside.

    “How can a company fire all the employees and kill the organizing drive?”
    See above. It is illegal for companies to fire people based on their union beliefs.

    “How can a company hold captive audience meetings and a union is barred from that?”
    A full time employee works approximately 40 hours a week. This means there are an additional 128 hours in a week that a union attempting to organize can meet and contact employees about their services. Unions can call employees, mail them, email them, send things to the local paper, and even go door to door to employees’ homes. Again, that is 40 hours when a company can talk to employees and 128 hours when unions can talk to employees.

    “Oh yes, the company is barred to, yea right.”
    This wasnt really a question, but its a false statement. Companies can conduct these meetings which they feel are important to their business just as long as the employees are getting paid. It would be illegal for companies to do these meetings outside of work because they have to be paid to listen. In the event there is an election going on, companies cannot conduct any meetings such as these in the window 24 hours prior to the vote.

    “The company will not go broke unless they give more than they can afford.”
    There will be no bargaining. It will all be federal mediating. Companies will say they cant change anything, unions will say they need to change everything, and the government will choose for itself somewhere in the middle. The company nor the union will actually negotiate.

    Strikes? just ask anyone from Boeing if they strike or not when the company says it will go broke if they give more than they can afford.

  • Anonymous 02/01/2009 11:34am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    I belong to a Union called “Unite”. They always support the presidental candidate that is for abortion. I don’t like the fact that they give money to this candidate. I think this should be stopped forever. Union money should be spent in protecting the employee. Not a political party. When they do support a candidate, they are going against my interest and not representing me and other fellow republicans and folks against the killing of babies.

  • Anonymous 02/01/2009 11:35am

    And now they want to end secret ballot. The unions need to be stopped.

  • Anonymous 02/02/2009 6:11am

    As an engineer in the automotive industry I’ve worked with many union folks over the years. I’ve found that the very good workers eventually find that no matter how hard they work or how good they are, they are only paid as much as the worst performer on the team. They become bitter and angry, and grow to dislike their jobs because they can never really succeed.

    Here are some of my favorite union stories:

    - One of our electricians was very good but had an attendance problem. He would be gone for a day or two every week, always with some excuse. Because of the union rules, he would be absent just enough to never be suspended from his job. One of his excuses was that he picked up a female hitchhiker and was raped at gunpoint for three days until being released. He eventually was suspended for 30 days (I think) but then was allowed to work again with a fresh record.

    - Union rules were such that engineers were not allowed to work inside electrical panels. Only electricians were allowed to do this. Electricians could not always be found easily, especially on weekends. When things went wrong, engineers would be under a lot of pressure from the operations team because of the amount of money required to keep a team of operators around a machine that was not producing anything. Sometimes there were simple problems that required only a wire to be reattached, or a new control module plugged into a slot. Many weekends there were electricians who would “patrol” the plant on golf carts to catch engineers inside of electrical panels. Rather than help fix the machine, these electricians would report the engineer, then get 1.5X pay for the entire day.

    - One of our electricians was a drug addict (whose brother happened to be the chief electrician, who had wrangled a post for his druggie brother somehow). This person came to work in an altered state every day. I worked with him for several years and did not see him “normal” once. Union regulations stated that engineers were not supposed to be allowed to work inside electrical panels – that was the dominion of the electrician. That rule was bent every time you had to work with the druggie brother of the chief electrician – he would hand the engineer his screwdriver and just watch. The druggie simply could not be fired because of his brother and the union.

    The bottom line is that the union is not just protecting the worker against poor conduct by the company, they are ensuring that no matter how bad someones job performance is, they will never be fired. This is a scheme where not just the company is the real victim, but the other workers that perform well and have to pay for the poor performance of a few. The unions I’ve been around are there to milk the company, milk the workers via dues, and contribute toward political parties many of their members do not support. This legislation is not defensible.

  • Anonymous 02/03/2009 11:03am

    Anyone against Unions is a fool or a manager for a company.

    A big company puts pressure on accountants and middle managers to make more profit for the company- thats not the problem at all. The workers at this point have no voice to help them get their fair share of the profits that the company enjoys. But, the point is not to destroy the host company. Ford employees feel proud of their company and even took pay decreases to help save the parent company. It’s a nice give and take EVEN in the contract negotiations. Its tough work and nobody wants to give up anything, but both sides need each other.

    First, Unions are not for simply solving relationship issues between a boss and a worker. Its about providing power to the employee who would otherwise have a small voice compared to the company’s voice. In other words, do you sign a contract like a manager providing years of income and security? Do you have pensions and health care? Do you have anyone looking out for the good of the workers in general?

    If you do have a company that’s concerned with worker welfare, great. Its pretty rare because the point of business is to make money- and when you grow a company, it becomes more profitable- and it becomes less likely that the managers know the workers personally- and less likely that they understand their problems or lifestyle.

    So, the big company puts pressure on accountants and middlemanagers to make more profit for the company. And thats not the problem at all. The workers at this point have no voice to help them get their fair share of the profits that the company enjoys.

    People are fired for talking about Unions. Why do you think this is? Its because the company wants to keep its money, because profit is the king.

    If this is the kind of system you like, move to China or Myanmar.

    I’m an IATSE member and work for a television station where we have a great union and a great company who are currently in negotion and we are under an extention of our current contract.

  • glennscu4 02/08/2009 5:24am

    The current system is not like any democratic election anywhere else in our society. The employer has all of the power. Through intimidation, harassment and firing employees who try to organize management controls the ballot/voting. Majority sign-up is NOT a new approach. Presently the employer decide how the election will be conducted. It should be the choice of the employees how they decide whether to form a union. If one third of the employees want an NLRB election they can still ask the federal government to hold an election.

  • Comm_reply
    trevosejoe 02/09/2009 2:56am

    Glennscu4 you are right. I also believe the Employee Free Choice Act will level the playing field. I would also like to see the Congressman who labor supported such as Ron Klein from Palm Beach County would support our interests when they get elected. RON KLEIN Please sign on as a Co-Sponser today.

  • Anonymous 02/11/2009 4:16pm

    unions are so worthless. you’re basically paying to set up another layer of management. the company isn’t going to give workers anything that will create a competitive disadvantage. what will happen is workers will wind up paying dues, get little or nothing in return, and all the money goes to union lobbying in washington. I believe workers have a basic right to organize, but that right is already in existance. Workers should also have the right to NOT join a union and in many states they don’t have that right.

  • drews2 02/21/2009 3:12pm

    I am generally pro-union. Unionized employees typically make more money and have better benefits, including health insurance, than non-unionized employees. If employees are not getting market wages and benefits and management will not discuss this in good faith, then unionize, tomorrow if you can.
    I think the EFCA is one attempt to address an abuse that has developed historically, whereby employers hold too much power in the process of seeking to unionize. The bill allows ample time for good faith negotiations for 90 days after the majority signs cards and 30 days for arbitration after that if necessary. That is better than the oft-delayed process used now which subjects employees to significant intimidation through well-learned union busting tactics.
    The real democracy that needs to be upheld is after the union is formed. Union members need to be able to set reasonable expectations of themselves as responsible employees and the union needs to be reasonable. Well-negotiated contracts are always good for the company and the employees. Union members do not help themselves by “ruining” a company with unreasonable demands, and generally, I don’t think they have done this in the past. The statistics support the facts that employees are too often prevented from unionizing through delays, intimidation, firing, etc. Who can cite any statistics about companies going under because of unions?

  • Anonymous 02/23/2009 6:54am

    From all of these posts, I have not see the main question answered.
    How does eliminating the secrete ballot level the playing field when it comes to voting to unionize?
    I don’t see where it lessens the companies ability to pressure the employee. I do see where it would give the union the ability to pressure the employee.
    If anyone can answer the question, please post.
    Thank You

  • Comm_reply
    drews2 02/23/2009 11:09am

    Good question. There are several ways companies can intimidate or create a hostile environment for employees desiring unions. You might find the following website useful. www.americanrightsatwork.org/ Do some exploring.

    EFCA requires employer to negotiate. There are time limits. At present many employers do not bargain in good faith and the penalties are without any real pain. Meanwhile, employers fire union organizers and threaten others that the company will go under if there is a union, or they will move the company. This is not allowed, but they get away with it at present. Companies spend big money on union-busting consultants (specialized law firms, usually). These experts come in and help the company prevent that which the employees want. The employees usually don’t have that kind of support. That can be intimidating in itself.

  • Anonymous 02/26/2009 6:07am
    Non-profits are between a rock and a hard place. Our funding comes from the government and every year it is a struggle to get it. We suffer budget cuts annually. If a union is voted in and a contract is forced upon us demanding higher wages and bigger benefits we will not survive. Our employees will be out of work and a 30 year old organization that serves developmentally disabled adults and children and has rescued numerous kids from the street would be no more. How does that help anyone?
  • Comm_reply
    drews2 02/27/2009 2:34pm

    First off, my youngest sister is developmentally disabled and benefits from services that non-profits provide. Their employees are dedicated and content. I want them to continue to be dedicated AND I want them to be reasonably satisfied.
    That said, no one can “force” a union on a group of employees, at least not without a majority of the employees signing cards.
    There are ways to convey employee concerns to management without having to unionize. But, if management will not respond, then unionize.
    If a union only exists to “screw” management, then it has failed in its task. But, if the union offers a voice to employees in negotiating a fair employment contract which secures the proper number of adequately paid employees to serve the clientele, then they are serving everyone.
    My advice: Be an employee who speaks up when there are concerns, sooner rather than later, both to management and other employees. You may be able to avoid having to seek the help of a union.

  • waynec 03/03/2009 2:42pm

    Until July of 08’ I have worked in union shops my entire career, over 30 years in the electrical utility field. My union experience has largely sucked. The whole idea of someone taking my money, excuse me, my dues and then do a very un-American thing by telling me how to vote. Unions suck! If they were so good they would use Detroit as their poster city. They wouldn’t be holding the U.S. automakers hostage with their contracts. They are criminal in their demands on employers.

    I now work for a non-union electric co-op and am loving it. It puts an extra $80 in my pocket every month. And these guys are as safe as or safer than the other 3 shops I have worked in before. If this phony “Employee Free Choice Act” type legislation becomes law I can’t wait until some scum sucking union punk approaches me. He’ll get 30 years of rage against the union machine.

  • waynec 03/03/2009 2:43pm

    And to answer “Anonymous, Feb 23, 2009 (8 days ago)” (hey dude, get a handle and quit hiding behind anonymous) this will not benefit anyone but the unions and intern the Democratic Party. Unions support the Dems and the Dems support the unions. Dude, come up to speed, read some history, learn to do the math.

  • PhillyBuster 03/10/2009 3:21pm

    Do you propose they hold a private election or do a card signing process to determine which way they should hold an election?

    “…It should be the choice of the employees how they decide whether to form a union…”

  • deborahg6 03/18/2009 5:45am

    I cannot believe that anyone would support this bill. 2 more years dems, enjoy it while you can.

  • strontium 03/25/2009 9:23am


    There is to much information available in this day and age to continue with all these opinions.

    Obama said it the most refreshing thing I’ve heard in years in his press conference of 3/25. " I like to know what I’m talking about before I speak "

Vote on This Bill

40% Users Support Bill

82 in favor / 123 opposed

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments