TWO SHOULD PLAY THIS GAME
Unions look to eliminate secret ballots and create an unlevel playing field with companies
BY CHUCK MUTH

Chuck Muth is president and CEO of Citizen Out reach. He is a professional political consultant. Find more about him and read more of his work at www.chuckmuth.com. Other stories by Chuck Muth

OK, let's boil this union-recruitment thing down to its most basic level: An entrepreneur risks blood, sweat and tears - and often his life's savings - to create a business, in the process creating jobs for others. Now let's say the company employs 100 people, all of whom willingly accepted their jobs at the agreed-to compensation offered by the business owner. Then along comes the Big Labor Borg ("You will be assimilated!").

A union agitator infiltrates, or salts, the workforce and immediately starts stirring up trouble. He or she convinces the employees that they're overworked and underpaid and promises to get the workers "everything you have coming to you … and then some." The sweet-talking union paramour promises the workers the moon - though all they're liable to end up with is cab fare in the morning. If that.

Anyway, an election is scheduled. The 100 workers cast a secret ballot on whether or not they want the union. If a majority of them vote in favor of letting the union do their talking for them, the union is in. And a new Borg collective is formed.

The problem for unions, though, is that fewer and fewer workers, when given a choice in a secret-ballot election, are electing to join the union collective. Recognizing this, the unions are trying to get rid of secret-ballot elections and instead force companies to recognize their right to represent workers through an insidious process commonly known today as "card check." The Culinary Union especially loves this scheme. Here's how it works:

The union agitator goes to each of the employees and asks (browbeats) them to sign a card stating that he or she wants the union. Once the agitator gets signed cards from a majority of the employees, the union wants to force the employer to recognize the union without the inconvenience of holding a secret-ballot election. 

After all, it's a lot easier for union agitators to threaten and coerce workers into signing a card in front of them than it is to control how that worker votes in the privacy of a voting booth, right?

So secret ballots are something the unionistas just can't cotton any longer, and they're pushing legislation on Capitol Hill that would require employers to recognize a union based on card checks rather than secret ballots.

Such un-American legislation should never see the light of day. But if it does, it ought to include the following Gander Clause - as in, what's good for the goose is good for the gander: If a card check, rather than a secret ballot, can be used to certify a union, then employers should be able to use a card check, rather than a secret ballot to de-certify a union. 

Hey, it's only fair, right? After all, shouldn't it be just as easy to get out of a lousy relationship as it is to get in to one? But something tells me fairness and a level playing field aren't what the union movement is all about today. LW