ThinkProgress Logo

Economy

Chamber Of Commerce: Arbitration Is ‘Poison’ Unless It Favors Us

poisonThe Associated Press reported that opponents of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), feeling that they have dispensed with majority sign-up, are starting to “intensify their attack on another major provision [of the bill]: Binding arbitration if a new union and management can’t agree on a first contract within 120 days.”

A popular narrative from these opponents is that majority sign-up was actually just a red herring, meant to distract everyone from the arbitration provision that labor really wanted. “We suspected from the beginning that the binding arbitration was packaged with the elimination of the secret ballot in order to create a straw man they could take down later,” said Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC). In that vein, the Chamber of Commerce had this to say about EFCA’s arbitration provision:

Card check is the political poison in the bill, but forced arbitration is the real poison,” said Steven Law, general counsel of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

If arbitration truly is poisonous, then the Chamber must have built up quite an immunity over the years. After all, it has consistently favored binding arbitration, when such arbitration helps it avoid litigation in consumer disputes. Here’s some of the Chamber’s prior rhetoric:

– Lisa A. Rickard, president of the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, wrote that the findings of an arbitration study “prove that arbitration continues to provide consumers with fair, inexpensive, and unbiased access to justice across the broadest spectrum of consumer disputes.” [3/11/09]

– The data is increasingly clear: for most consumers, arbitration is a better way to resolve disputes than being forced into court. [Chamber Press release, 7/15/08]

Virtually any type of dispute between private individuals or entities can be addressed by arbitration, including, for example, contract, real estate, employment, and tort disputes. [U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, “Issues Resource Center”]

Overall, U.S. companies include mandatory arbitration clauses in 75 percent of consumer agreements. The Chamber seems to have no problem with that, but when arbitration translates into workers getting a fair shot at a contract, it’s suddenly poisonous.

Arbitration is a necessary part of EFCA because, all too often, employees vote to form a union, but can’t get a first contract due to their employer’s delay tactics. More than half of new unions still have no contract one year after they are certified, and 37 percent have no contract after two years. A full quarter of new unions wait more than three years to receive a first contract.

Specter: ‘My Views’ On EFCA ‘Have Been Consistent’

ap090715017464On Sunday, the Philadelphia Inquirer’s Kevin Ferris wrote a column describing Sen. Arlen Specter’s (D-PA) tiptoeing around the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). Specter is one of the senators working with Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) to salvage the bill, and Ferris wrote that Specter — who earlier in the year announced his intention to oppose the bill — needs EFCA to pass, as he “now needs labor support because of the expected primary challenge from U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak.”

In response to the column, Specter wrote a Letter to the Editor claiming that his stance on EFCA has been consistent:

I have no hesitancy in stating my own views. I have voted to have the Senate consider the modification of labor law to reform the way unions are certified and to provide procedures for negotiating first contracts. Earlier this year, I made a floor statement opposing giving up the secret ballot and suggesting the last-best-offer procedure on arbitration. My views on this subject have been consistent, and suggestions to the contrary by those intending to run against me are incorrect.

As Dan Hirschhorn at PA2010.com pointed out, “only Specter knows what his true views are, and while they may be consistent, his actions on the legislation have been anything but.”

Indeed, Specter was a co-sponsor of the bill and voted for cloture when the Senate considered it in 2007. However, earlier this year (before switching parties), Specter took to the Senate floor to announce that he would vote against cloture. Even after the party switch, Specter released a statement emphasizing that “my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.”

But last month, Specter addressed a crowd of union activists and told them “I believe you’ll be satisfied with my vote on this issue.” So the only thing Specter has really been consistent on is a consistent willingness to wobble back and forth on the issue.

Cross-posted on ThinkProgress.

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up