The rise in union-busting efforts

(via Ezra Klein)

One of the arguments made by the right is that EFCA will somehow lead to intimidation of workers to join unions. I'm not exactly sure how that would work, but based on research recently released, we do have some evidence about another phenomenon:

By 2007, pro-union workers involved in union election campaigns faced about a 1.8 percent chance of being illegally fired during the course of the campaign. If we assume that employers target union organizers and activists, and that union organizers and activists make up about 10 percent of pro-union workers, our estimates suggest that almost one-in-five union organizers or activists can expect to be fired as a result of their activities in a union election campaign.

Maybe it would make sense for Rep Hasner and his allies on this issue to read up on what real intimidation looks. Perhaps he could follow up with a review of some of the opinions on the effects of unionization while he is at it.

Hasner wrong about EFCA

Post on Politics blogged about Adam Hasner's (R-Boca) press release:

“House Democrats picked their leader in the workplace by secret ballot; now let’s see if House Democrats will allow Floridians in every workplace the same secret ballot right,”

To tell you the truth, I'm a little stunned by this. Hasner is misleading the public about the legislation. The Employee Free Choice Act, aka EFCA, preserves workers’ rights to secret balloting. Read it yourself. It's in Section 2(a)(6). Go ahead, it's short. Where is the restriction?

On the other hand, the PoP blog does not note that Hasner is wrong on this. Why the silence?