Columbus partner Mike Asensio was quoted in the July 20, 2009, Employment Law360 article, "Nixing Card-Check Could Shift, Not Quell, EFCA Debate."
According to the article, a new version of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) that would eliminate the card-check provision is reportedly taking shape, but the pared-down bill still won't be palatable to employers. Doing away with the card-check provision would mean more attention on other aspects of the EFCA that businesses find objectionable—like its binding arbitration provisions and its call for stiffer penalties for employers found to have engaged in unfair labor practices, according to the article.
If forced into the arbitration process, the decision rendered by arbitration board would be binding for two years unless amended during such period by written consent of the parties. While the prospect of binding arbitration makes an agreement a certainty in the near term, the possibility of "strikes and unrest" looms when the two-year period is up, said Asensio.
According to the article, an EFCA compromises could include leaving the long-standing secret ballot system for recognizing unions in place, but cut the timetable for completing the election from the current 42 days down to five to 10 days. "My fear is that a five- to 10-day election period is not nearly enough time for an employer to get out their side of the story," Asensio said.
The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) President said that EFCA was undergoing the standard legislative process, and that his organization expected to see card-check return in a final version of the bill or an amendment to it, according to the article. But, Asensio said, what the SEIU really wants to do is see who votes for the card-check bill and who votes against it, and "take a political roll call among those they've given money to."