With President Barack Obama having signed the $787 billion economic stimulus bill, other items on his domestic agenda are moving to the forefront.
One of these is likely to be the Employee Free Choice Act, a bill which would fundamentally change labor law by allowing the easier formation of unions.
Previous versions of the act have died in Congress, but with a Democratic president and Democrats holding greater majorities in the House and Senate, the chances for the EFCA to become law have improved. So debate over the issue is heating up — nationally and locally — with unions favoring it and the business community largely in opposition.
The most contentious section of the bill states unions can form if a simple majority of workers sign cards. Supporters say this will reduce employer harassment when organizers try to unionize, while critics say it essentially eliminates the secret ballot under which union elections have long been conducted.
Independent polling shows a healthy majority of American workers would choose to belong to a union if they didn't have to worry about repercussions from their employers, said EFCA supporter Diane Topakian, political program coordinator for the Service Employees International Union Pennsylvania State Council.
"Most economists would agree that union jobs are better jobs," said Topakian, who lives in Lancaster.
"If we want to rebuild the American middle class, we have to make it a little bit easier to say, 'We want a union on the job and not be punished for it,' " she said.
Ralph Simpson Jr., president and chief executive of Warfel Construction Co., East Petersburg, said businesses such as his oppose the EFCA because "we feel it's slanted toward the unions."
"It seems like [proponents are] trying to fix something that's not broken," he said.
As stated in the National Labor Relations Act, there are two ways to form a union. First, if at least 30 percent of employees sign petition cards requesting a union, the cards are submitted to the National Labor Relations Board and a secret-ballot election is held. A majority of workers must vote in favor of a union in that election for it to be formed.
Second, if more than 50 percent of employees certify their desire for representation by signing a card, then a union can choose to form. However, the employer doesn't have to recognize the card-check petition and can require a secret-ballot vote overseen by the NLRB.
Under the Employee Free Choice Act, the NLRB would recognize the union's role as the official bargaining representative if a majority of employees have authorized that representation via card check, and would deny employers the right to demand a secret ballot.
The EFCA allows employees to choose a secret-ballot process to elect union representation if they don't want a card-check election, but employers must accept whatever method the workers choose.
The act also strengthens penalties against companies that coerce or intimidate workers trying to form unions and to bargain, and establishes mediation and binding arbitration when the employer and employees cannot agree on a first contract.
The SEIU's Topakian said the card-check process would greatly reduce intimidation by employers.
Under current law, in the weeks before secret-ballot elections are held, bosses often harass workers trying to unionize, she said.
As a union organizer, "I've had that experience," Topakian said.
She said she's seen employers pull nurses or certified nursing assistants away from their patients to attend captive-audience meetings with bosses and anti-union consultants.
According to the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO, one quarter of private-sector organizing campaigns result in employees being fired.
The way things stand now, "employers have all the power," said Marietta resident and EFCA supporter Don Pickle Jr., field representative for Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, Local 5 Pennsylvania.
Simpson, of Warfel Construction, said he fears the card-check option will lead to intimidation of workers by union organizers.
Though the EFCA allows secret-ballot elections, it effectively eliminates them because unionizing employees will have "almost no reason to opt for that" over the card-check process, said Lancaster attorney Tom Davies.
Davies represents the Keystone Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors Inc., which opposes the EFCA. He's also a former trial attorney with the National Labor Relations Board.
Davies defended the secret ballot as fundamental to democratic processes, saying it's the way we've long chosen our elected officials.
The time before a secret-ballot election, under current law, also gives employers the chance to "offer their side of the story" to workers thinking of unionizing, Davies said. That's not true with the card-check option, he said.
Tom Baldrige, president of the Lancaster Chamber of Commerce & Industry, which opposes the bill, agreed with Davies.
The EFCA "would eliminate employers' ability to educate their work force" about the impact of unions, he said.
The union-business divide is clear in the bill's other provisions, as well.
While the National Labor Relations Act levies no fines against employers who violate its terms, the EFCA does: up to $20,000 for each violation of the new law.
Topakian, of SEIU PA, said the fines are necessary because what exists now is not a strong enough deterrent to employers.
Davies, the attorney, said he has no problem with the section of the EFCA that says workers found to be unlawfully terminated will receive triple back pay.
But he said the fine provision could result in crippling penalties for businesses since separate statements made by an employer can be counted as individual violations. "That's potentially very costly," Davies said.
The EFCA also states that if an employer and a union are bargaining for their first contract and cannot reach an agreement within 90 days, either party may refer the dispute to the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. If the service can't bring the sides together after 30 days of mediation, the dispute will be referred to arbitration, the results of which will be binding on the parties for two years.
Topakian said this is a fair solution because both employers and workers have to abide by the arbitrators' decision.
Simpson, on the other hand, said he doesn't at all like the idea "that a government panel could set wages and benefits."
And Davies called mandatory arbitration "a radical departure from existing labor law."
Pennsylvania will likely play a pivotal role in whether the EFCA becomes law because moderate Republican Sen. Arlen Specter is a swing vote, said the chamber's Baldrige.
The last time the Employee Fair Choice Act made it to the Senate, it was killed by a GOP filibuster. But now the Democrats are close to a filibuster-proof majority, and Specter's vote could make the difference one way or the other, he said.
"The broader business community will be watching," Baldrige said.
Paula Wolf is a staff writer for the Sunday News. She can be reached by e-mail at pwolf@lnpnews.com. 