NEW LAW WOULD AUTHORIZE GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF 4 MILLION SMALL BUSINESSES

National Center for Policy Analysis ^ | March 13, 2009 | National Center for Policy Analysis

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA, H.R. 1409, S. 560) does more than take away secret ballot elections: It empowers the federal government to impose contracts on newly organized companies. The government would set wages, benefits, work assignments, promotion procedures, and any major changes to business operations. Because EFCA has no meaningful small businesses exemption, it would authorize federal control of up to 4 million small businesses employing 39 million Americans.

Consequently, bureaucrats with no management experience would effectively control these small businesses, says James Sherk, the Bradley Fellow in Labor Policy at the Heritage Foundation.

The misnamed Employee Free Choice Act affects both large and small businesses, says Sherk:

• The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) has a small business exception, however, this exemption has not been updated for inflation since 1959.
• It covers all non-retail businesses with gross revenues of $50,000 a year and retail businesses with gross revenues over $500,000 a year.
• To put those figures into perspective, the average private-sector worker costs his or her employer $56,000 a year in wages and benefits--before the cost of any capital needed to do the job.
• A business with one worker earning average pay would not qualify, consequently, the law has no meaningful small businesses exemption.

The Heritage Foundation used Census Bureau data to calculate how many small businesses EFCA would affect: The act covers 4,180,000 businesses employing 38,934,000 workers.

EFCA takes away these workers' right to a secret ballot vote on joining a union -- a consequence that has attracted considerable controversy, says Sherk. However, the bill has a second provision of equal if not greater significance to small businesses that has attracted much less attention: EFCA replaces collective bargaining with government-imposed contracts for newly organized companies. In practice:

• EFCA will effectively eliminate collective bargaining for initial contracts because the system provides no reason for unions not to hold out for a government contract.
• Unions would have strong incentives to make extreme demands and hope the FMCS appointed arbitrator splits the difference between these demands and management's position.

Granting such a radical amount of power to the FMCS puts control of workplaces in the hands of unaccountable government bureaucrats, says Sherk.

Source: James Sherk, "EFCA Authorizes Government Control of 4 Million Small Businesses," Heritage Foundation, WebMemo #2341, March 12, 2009.

For text:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Labor/wm2341.cfm

For more on Unions:

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=43

[bossmechanic]

Yup....
We need more fake crisis so we can have more laws.
Can’t wait for the carbon tax/climate change BS actually blossoms.
Guess it’s a good time to apply for a job with the EPA.

[GBA]

Now is it time for the revolution? If these last two months haven't been reason enough, what will it take? I suppose we shall find out as we still have many years left on our sentence.

[Sgt_Schultze]

Even though small business will be impacted, this bill is aimed directly at WalMart.

[TexasRepublic]

State control of private business is called FACISM.

[KittenClaws]

The end goal of communism is to have all the means of production in the hands of government. Obama is trying to move the country to that situation as soon as possible

I have a feeling that what Obama wants and what he gets, may be two different things.

[Red6]

Any government job I guess.

The government will guarantee all people a job soon, it's in the Constitution I hear; just like your right to privacy and abortion, health care and social security, a free college education.........

[Vermont Lt]

Actually, it is more like Obama going around collecting votes and McCain not even knowing their is an election coming until inauguration day.

This is insane. The unions get to tell the employees anything they want; promise things they cannot deliver. The employer does not even get the right to have a say.

[lonevoice]

The media just keeps calling it “card check”, without much further explanation. A significant majority of Americans have no clue what “card check” means, and the rest of us, including me, had no idea this bill would effectively give control of businesses to the feds. The hits just keep comin’, as they say.

[mojitojoe]

If I were a small or medium sized business owner, as soon as my employees started any kind of unionization effort, I’d shut the business down and sell off the assets.
_____________
Yep, in a heartbeat I would do the same.

[KarenMarie]

That is exactly what the owner of the biz that my hubby does work for threatened to do a few years back. A few of the drivers started stirring the pot, trying to get a union in for the drivers, and the owner said point blank that he would close the doors and sell off all the trucks and let them find another job.

Thing is... having a union in there... he would have to lay off half the workforce to afford the rest and that would put him out of business anyway. But he refused to allow a union to run him out, he said he would do it himself first.

[freekitty]

Like that guy who was supposedly helping voters by pulling the lever himself.

[NRA2BFree]

If I were a small or medium sized business owner, as soon as my employees started any kind of unionization effort, I’d shut the business down and sell off the assets.

Imagine their surprise when they come in some Monday morning, expecting to make 5 times minimum wage only to find they’re out of a job.

I’d leave a big sign up for them that says “How’s that whole union thing working out for you?”

About 30 years ago there was a company named Fairchild Semi-conductors that had built a plant on the Navajo Indian Reservation. There were over 5000 Navajos who worked there, and then the unions started making demands and called a strike. When they all went on strike, Fairchild shut their doors and moved off the reservation. That cost over 5K employees their jobs. Needless to say, they were stunned. Of course, the union went away since there was no more income, and those people who have bought nice homes and nice cars lost it all.

Having owned several small businesses, I can tell you for sure that many small businesses would follow the path that Fairchild took. We've already got too much government intrusion in our businesses.

[AliVeritas]

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE52C59220090313

OT: I guess you heard about the dropping of enemy combatant already.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE52C59220090313

[AliVeritas]

Why is it every where communism is or has been implemented, it’s horrible, yet they always think this time it will work? ‘It wasn’t done right’ ‘We should have fought harder’ ‘He wasn’t a real Marxist’ ‘It was a utopia’ (spoken from another country, of course)

What the heck goes on in these minds?

[Rick_Michael]

doesn’t sound good at all....to watch...

[arthurus]

Why would anyone even start a business in such conditions?

[arthurus]

This will be a tremendous step toward Government Unions as in the USSR in the bad old days. And these government unions will control businesses without having “title” to them.In Germany in 1939 business owners had such titles to their businesses and it did not mean much.

[HonestConservative]

This is just nutz.

[ffff]

Mira,

Señor pobre hombre, ¿tienes alguna empleos?

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks stockpirate.

and thanks Gabz:

Madness, from D.C. to Denver
(NOW, we can take over Agriculture - or at least TAX IT TO DEATH)
summit daily | March 10 | Liddick
Posted on 03/13/2009 9:15:06 AM PDT by jessduntno
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2205903/posts