This one is posted over at The Truth About the EFCA. It is a good example of why business will be harmed severely by the EFCA…

My company has been operating for more than sixty years — six decades — to build the American dream. We have been named America’s top concrete construction firm in four of the last five years. So take it seriously when I warn: The Employee Free Choice Act could kill my company, and many like it.

EFCA, known by many as the “card check” bill is an absolute abomination. Its card check provision would allow union organizers to harass thousands of my company’s employees. Its “binding arbitration” provision would substitute the judgment of a government-imposed busybody for decades of practical know-how developed during the building of a successful company within the free enterprise system. That’s why this fight is personal for me, my family, and thousands of our employees.

The fallout from EFCA could be severe. From a business perspective, it would make the already-difficult economy even tougher because the labor market would be much less flexible. And the notion of having the government dictate terms of private contracts is mystifying. But from an employee’s perspective, there is worry that the large economic effect of EFCA will be massive job loss.

That this issue is alive at all is a testament to the fact that workplace issues are complex and arcane. Most people have no daily experience with union organizing laws — and it’s an area that’s still misunderstood by those who do deal with the subject. Many people wrongly believe unions do not have fair access to “pitch” employees on their service. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Organized labor has relied on these misperceptions because it desperately needs to pass EFCA (or some form of it) to usher in millions of new members and their dues dollars. Of course, if a private business like mine asked the government to pass a law virtually forcing people to pay for my service, there would be unstoppable outrage (much as we have seen from citizens and editorial boards who are aware of EFCA). In part, organized labor needs to continue to fund its political operations. A lesser known concern is that many union-run pension funds have run out of sufficient membership to keep the funds solvent and, consequently, unions are seeking ways to get more people “in the door” to stay afloat.

Whatever the reason EFCA is pushed by a special interest, it is not in the interest of working Americans or the free enterprise system. We, and our elected leaders, must continue our promising fight against EFCA and any “compromise” that harms employee rights and the health of our economy.

Brett McMahon is vice president of Miller and Long and a member of Associated Builders and Contractors. His opinions are his own and do not necessarily represent those of ABC.

For more info visit http://thetruthaboutefca.com/.

We have detailed the flagging support that the unions have experienced over their desire to get the Employee Free Choice Act passed. We’ve detailed how several Senators have bailed on the EFCA and stated they won’t support it. We’ve also reported that the Speaker of the House has said she won’t raise it if there is no chance it’ll get through the Senate.

But it ain’t over until the fat lady sings. Big Labor is mounting an offensive meant to strong-arm Congress into approving this economy killing bill despite its lack of support.

As Politico reports:

The hot contest over the legislation also known as “card check” may have cooled for the moment, but labor has rolled out a national TV ad and grass-roots campaign to coincide with the congressional recess, and there is still a chance that a stripped-down version of the bill will pass this year.

And this new campaign is also filled with cooked polling numbers skewed in favor of the union position, naturally. And it is not a legitimate use of polls.

…when advocates or opponents use these numbers out of context in statements or press releases, they are essentially attempting to form public opinion by asserting that they already know what public opinion is — which can produce the kind of absurdist discrepancies that have been a hallmark of the labor/management smackdown thus far.

Personally, I don’t really believe aANY poll no matter who conducted it these days. But I don’t believe ANYTHING a unions says, in any case.

From www.shopfloor.org

(Hat tip: James Lileks, who uses Xtranormal.com for Retweet Theater.)

Former Mass. Governor and candidate for president, Mitt Romney, speaks out against card check.

Union bill undemocratic and harmful to economy

In 2006, my last year as governor of Massachusetts, I vetoed a card-check bill that allowed public workers to organize if a majority signed union authorization cards as opposed to casting a traditional secret ballot. The veto was a gain for the rights of employees and employers to a fair election, but the victory was short-lived. After I left office, organized labor had another run at replacing the secret ballot with a card check. With the support of Democrats in the Legislature, that same bill was passed in 2007 – and my Democratic successor signed it into law. What happened next is a cautionary tale for Congress as it moves toward a vote on national card-check legislation.

With this powerful new tool, for the first time ever in Massachusetts, a charter school was unionized.

One reason so many parents want their children in charter schools is precisely because they operate free of union contracts, so that when administrators want to try something new, they can implement it quickly. For this, charter schools are fiercely resented by teachers’ unions as a competitor to failing public schools. Charter schools use a merit system, rewarding teachers according to results in the classroom. They don’t have complicated work rules that smother creativity, nor are they burdened with termination rules that make it almost impossible to dismiss an incompetent teacher.

By tilting the playing field in favor of unions, card check not only robs workers of a secret ballot, it deprives management of the right to express its point of view. It will dramatically change the workplace as we know it. Small businesses will have to hire labor lawyers and follow burdensome new rules. If the parties can’t agree on a contract, mandatory arbitration follows and employers that don’t yield to union demands will have contracts foisted on them. All of this will raise costs, leading to more unemployment.

Unions are supposed to serve the interests of working people, yet in this case more power for the unions would help destroy many thousands of jobs throughout the economy.

Read the rest at the Patriot Ledger.