Issues
OP-ED: EFCA sends wrong message to investors seeking favorable business climate
by Hon. Mitt Romney
During my tenure as Governor of Massachusetts, one of my highest priorities was maintaining a healthy business climate in order to keep the Commonwealth competitive. Frequently, this was not an easy task—we had to overcome the “Taxachusetts” label, after all. So in order to attract new capital to our state, I focused on balancing our budget without raising taxes. I also supported small businesses and advocated for free market solutions. As Massachusetts’ businessfriendly reputation grew, investment and job growth in our state increased.
Importantly, I vetoed a card check bill for public employees that would have resulted in a proliferation of labor organizing driven by union bosses that may not have reflected the genuine desires of the workforce. This bill was subsequently signed into law after I left office, however. Unfortunately, not long after, a charter school was unionized for the first time ever, unbeknownst to the parents and administrators at the school.
The misleadingly titled Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) is being considered on Capitol Hill, and it has many supporters who argue that it will provide more choice for workers.
Nothing could be further from the truth. How can anyone honestly believe that freedom is served by replacing the secret ballot with a public card check for workers considering forming a union? The old democratic standby of the secret ballot eliminates any undue influence and allows every worker to freely and anonymously express his or her opinion with a straightforward “yes” or “no” vote.
Unions bosses don’t like this method for certification because it is naturally more difficult to get votes without looking over workers’ shoulders while they cast their ballot; and an election only allows them to ask once.
By itself, the card check provision is enough to discourage investors already concerned with the prospects of backing a start-up business in a challenging economic environment. Just as troubling is the fact that its binding arbitration procedure would in many cases circumvent talented management teams and instead put federally appointed bureaucrats in charge of deciding the terms of collective bargaining agreements.
Businesses, especially small businesses, are suffering through these difficult times just like the average household. Their overhead costs are rising and their revenue is shrinking. But we can help them ride out this recession and retain jobs by providing them with more flexibility, not rigid union rules.
Ultimately, investors will take their capital to places where businesses have that flexibility and are able to reward their best workers with higher pay, or reassign workers to duties that best use their skills. But they will not invest in businesses that are manipulated with arbitrary bargaining deadlines and secretive organizing campaigns.
Unions are at their best when they are democratic, transparent, and accountable to their membership. EFCA would change that, and make a bad economic situation worse. If Congress and the President want to succeed in their efforts to turn the economy around as quickly as possible, they can start by taking the ‘Forced’ Choice Act off the table. The bottom line is: this is bad legislation that will deter investment, cripple businesses—especially small businesses—and subject workers to intimidation and undue influence.
Mitt Romney is former governor of Massachusetts.
