Start with the democrats propensity to lie using Orwellian descriptions and definitions that bear little resemblance to reality. A democrat world where up is down, left is right, black is white, good is evil and most importantly freedom is government control.

Consider the Employee Free Choice Act of 2007 …

Imagine working your entire life building a business, risking your own money, time, effort – only to see your employees band together and using the force of the government, dictate pay, benefits and work rules. Adding an entire level of bureaucracy and reporting to your operation. Selecting and promoting employees based on seniority rather than merit and achievement.

And to add insult to injury, imagine that the government would be allowed to dictate the terms of the contract, valid for a period of two years, should the parties be unable to negotiate a successful contract.

According to CNSNews …

“Card-Check Bill Would Empower Federal Government to Dictate Labor Agreements”

“A provision in the controversial Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) would allow federal arbitrators to dictate the terms of labor contracts – contracts that would be binding on both businesses and employees for two years.”

“The bill, which is heavily favored by labor unions and congressional Democrats, says that if a majority of workers wish to unionize, the employer must enter into collective bargaining with them within 10 days of their decision.”

Negotiating at the point of a gun …

“' ‘Not later than 10 days after receiving a written request for collective bargaining,’ the bills states, ‘the parties shall meet and commence to bargain collectively.’
If, after 90 days, no agreement is reached, the law empowers federal arbitrators to step in and facilitate negotiations between a business and the new union.”

“If after the expiration of the 90-day period beginning on the date on which bargaining is commenced  ... the parties have failed to reach an agreement, either party may notify the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service of the existence of a dispute and request mediation.”

Binding for two years …

“ ‘If the government fails to negotiate a compromise within 30 days, the law allows it to dictate one, which will be binding for two years unless both parties agree to amend it.
“(If) the Service is not able to bring the parties to agreement by conciliation,’ the law says, ‘the arbitration panel shall render a decision settling the dispute and such decision shall be binding upon the parties for a period of 2 years, unless amended during such period by written consent of the parties.’”

No appeal …

“The EFCA would grant no opportunity to either employees or businesses to appeal the government’s decision, nor would it allow a newly organized union to vote on the deal.  The law also does not allow for unions to strike if they don’t like the government-mandated agreement.”

Not a contract …

“Any agreement the government dictates wouldn’t be a contract, said Heritage Foundation labor expert James Sherk, because contracts are negotiated between two parties, not dictated by governments.
“ ‘You can’t really call it a contract, because a contract is voluntarily agreed to by both parties,’ Sherk told CNSNews.com. ‘They will dictate to the company and the workers the conditions that would have been in a labor contract for the next two years.’
‘Whatever the arbitrator hands down is final. The workers lose all say, and the employers lose all say,’ Sherk added.”

Considered before and rejected …

“The bill, if it becomes law, would amend the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, a Depression-era law designed to give workers increased rights to unionize. A mandatory arbitration proposal was considered then, too, Sherk said, but was rejected on the grounds that it actually took power away from workers.”

Disputed by the union …

“A spokesman for the AFL-CIO, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that the new law would not allow the government to simply dictate terms to workers. Instead, any federal ruling would be based on previous negotiations – guaranteeing workers a contract.”

Contracts negotiated under better times and different conditions?

“It would certainly be a more complicated process. It would be based on the negotiations already taking place. It is trying to make the process more fair so that workers can be guaranteed that should they organize a union, they would have a contract.”

“Sherk argued that the mandatory arbitration proposal was worse than central planning, because it lacked a coherent process for dictating bargains.”

Functionaries?

“These arbitrators have no expertise. Their goal is to bring people together. They don’t have the economic expertise to write these contracts. They don’t know the working conditions. They don’t have the business background to write business conditions for these companies,” Sherk said.
“It’s got all the downsides of bureaucratic central planning without the upsides of at least having a coherent central plan.”

A reward for helping to elect Barack Obama …

The legislation has passed the House, but it has not passed the Senate. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told Fox News’ Chris Wallace on Sunday that the EFCA would be passed early this year for President-elect Barack Obama to sign.
“I don’t know about the first month, but we’re going to pass it early,” Hoyer said.

Organized thuggery to support its leadership …

There is no secret that I believe most union leadership to be self-serving, corrupt and not really representing the best interests of the rank and file. That their continual push for higher wages, better benefits, reduced work, onerous and complex work rules – and their ability to hold companies hostage to their demands is an anti-freedom toxic socialist element being introduced into American life.

Where unions once served an employee protection purpose in an industrialized or agrarian society, we have now moved on to a technological society which, by definition, requires fewer unskilled workers and mandates professional-level qualifications. The need for collective bargaining in this atmosphere is counter-productive, especially when one rewards seniority over individual achievement.

Bottom line …

Whenever you find democrats and unions, you see companies in trouble, areas turned into decaying slums and, in general, reduced economic productivity.

I am greatly troubled by the idea of increasing union control over the mechanisms of government, lest we see widespread strikes like those occurring in Europe.

And to allow the unions to conduct recruiting drives without the use of secret ballots only increases the probability of coercive recruiting activities.

What can YOU do?

Tell your elected officials that you see no reason to add another level of bureaucratic inefficiency and costs to government and commerce in these difficult economic times – especially as a self-interested payback to those who helped elect the very same legislators who are attempting to pass this deleterious legislation.

Fight to return to a civil service system without public employee unions. Insure that no unions have access to critical government infrastructure which they might be prone to sabotage in periods of work-related disputes.

Fight against socialism and the collectivism which is rapidly destroying our nation in favor of the individualism that made our America great.

Take care of yourself and insure that you continue to develop salable skills which will allow you to prosper in both good time and bad.

Be well and be safe.

-- steve

Quote of the day:  “What luck for rulers that men do not think.” -- Adolf Hitler

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

Businessmen: to see the legislative perpetrators who would deny your freedom in running your own business …