'By their enemies shall ye know them.'

The ancient proverb is gaining renewed relevance in the current debate surrounding the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). Passage of this potentially landmark bill has been organized labor's first priority as the new Congress convened. For those still making up their minds it should be helpful to consider how the forces are lining up.

First, however, we should summarize what the proposed legislation actually says. Its most significant provision would be 'card check recognition' of a union. In other words, if a majority of the employees in an 'appropriate unit' sign cards authorizing a union as their bargaining agent and present them to the NLRB as proof, then the employer will be legally required to recognize and bargain in good faith with the union on wages, hours and working conditions. EFCA would also establish stronger penalties for employers who threaten or act against workers trying to organize or to bargain for a first contract. If enacted, this legislation could fundamentally improve the situation of workers by restoring the 'balance' that corporate America has worked overtime to destroy in recent years.

So, what is the problem? Workers deserve a fair chance to organize a union, right? In fact, not everyone agrees, which brings us to the proverb quoted above. The US Chamber of Commerce, a leading force opposing EFCA, expressed its position early and gave us the most cogent statement of the thinking of the bill's opponents. Attorney Charles Cohen testified on behalf of the Chamber before the Senate subcommittee on labor and education in 2004. EFCA would, he argued, deprive employees of the right of free choice guaranteed by the National Labor Relations Act. In terms reminiscent of the arguments of supporters of state 'right to work (for less)' laws, he argued that EFCA takes away a worker's right to a secret ballot election and that card check agreements 'limit employee free choice.'

Cohen's argument gives pause, although perhaps not for the reason he intended. His argument stands reality on its head. EFCA actually increases workers' options. It would leave open the option of a secret ballot election where the percentage of workers signing cards is less than a majority. However, where the NLRB determines that a majority of the workers had chosen the union by signing cards, the board would not conduct an election. The real problem that the Chamber of Commerce has with EFCA appears later in Cohen's testimony, where he tips the chamber's hand. Organized labor, he allows, may bring support from other workers to bear on an organizing campaign.

'Political … pressure may be coupled with other forms of public relations pressure in order to exert additional leverage on the employer … The pressure comes from bargaining units at other locations … and the public at large.'

 In other words, EFCA may increase the ability of the broader working class to exert its influence, come to the support of fellow workers, and force an employer to recognize a union and come to the bargaining table. Once workers see what this can accomplish, anything is possible.

Passage of EFCA could also lead to further changes in labor law favorable to workers and unions. For instance, workers in higher education have recently suffered setbacks due to court decisions and legal interpretation of existing law. A series of decisions have, for example, thwarted the most determined efforts of graduate assistants at private universities to organize. At the University of Pennsylvania in December 2001, graduate assistants turned in cards signed by a majority of the potential bargaining unit favoring representation by the American Federation of Teachers. An election was held over a year later, but the ballots were impounded at the university's request and never counted. In this case, the university undermined workers' rights on two counts: card check recognition and a secret ballot election. What better example could we find of the need for major labor law reform – beginning with the Employee Free Choice Act?

Would EFCA mean a 'magic bullet' for labor and an immediate leap in union membership? That remains to be seen. As one veteran organizer said to this writer, it might be a breakthrough, but 'it's not a gift.' To get over half the workers to sign cards in an establishment where the employer has a record of anti-union activity will be no small challenge. What it would do is remove the employers' power to conduct campaigns of intimidation after the cards are signed. This could result in overcoming barriers to union organization among workers long denied the opportunity. Since a large proportion of workers currently attempting to organize are national minorities and women, this legislation is objectively anti-racist and anti-gender discrimination and deserves the support of all working people, organized and unorganized. Bringing so many new workers into the struggle for labor rights and for a pro-worker agenda could reshape the political landscape in our country. So, whether you are a union member or not (yet), we urge readers to take concrete action to push for passage of this all important piece of legislation. It is important for individual voters to made their sentiments known, even if your union or other organization is already on record in support.

Many unions are urging their members to do ust that. Call your Congress person; visit your Congress person; go on line to www.unionvoice.org and sign the petition supporting EFCA.  If you are part of a delegation to visit your representative, your delegation might want to mention other issues important to labor, such as the minimum wage. We don't urge people to ignore the other issues, but EFCA should be a central part of any presentation to Congressional representatives on labor's program.