Pro-labor forum touts union organizing law

<p>California Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s ears must have burned at least a little Saturday as her name came up often during a labor-sponsored forum on the Employee Free Choice Act.</p><p>The Democratic lawmaker withdrew her endorsement of the federal legislation last month because of concern about the economy, and advocates rallying Saturday in Santa Rosa said changing her mind was critical to victory. </p><p>Nearly every speaker at a forum on the subject at Santa Rosa Junior College urged those in the crowd of more than 110 to lobby Feinstein by mail or phone.</p><p>“We have already won in the court of public opinion,” said North Bay Labor Council President Michael Allen, the forum moderator. “It’s really a matter of moving a couple key votes in the Senate.”</p><p>Feinstein’s vote is one of several hurdles to enactment of the co-called “card-check” bill, which is aimed at making it easier for workers to join unions.</p><p>Even advocates noted that pro-industry groups are prepared to spend big to prevent the act from passing.</p><p>Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Petaluma, and others said Saturday that Democrats and labor unions re-energized by the election of President Barack Obama should seize momentum and his support for the act to push it through.</p><p>The bill would require the National Labor Relations Board to certify a bargaining representative for workers if a majority check a card favoring unionization. </p><p>Workers could thus opt out of secret elections and campaigns that the act’s supporters say are prone to management intimidation and coercion.</p><p>Advocates said it’s needed to restore wages and compensation and to rebuild America’s middle class, which they say has declined over time with the weakening of unions and economic policies favoring the rich.</p><p>“EFCA,” Woolsey said, using the acronym for the act, “is really the middle class bailout bill, and we must support it.”</p><p>But critics call it undemocratic because it allows unions to bypass secret elections they say are designed to allow workers to express their views privately.</p><p>They also say the act would prove burdensome to employers, many of whom are struggling just to stay in business.</p><p>“Many people want to make this employers against employees, when really the fundamental question is, how can we help businesses survive and be sustainable so they ultimately employ those employees,” Kristina Derkos, president of the Professional Association of Sonoma County for Human Resources, said in an interview Friday. “And that’s the balancing act I don’t see proposed in this act.”</p><p>A simlar point was made by Brenda Gilchrist, managing partner of The HR Matrix in Santa Rosa. “Employees deserve the right to make a private decision regarding their decision to join a union,” she said. “The coercion inherent under EFCA could lead to employees making decisions that do not reflect their sincere views on unions. Spread across a beleaguered national economy, a great deal of unwanted union representation from EFCA could have a staggering impact on countless employers.”</p><p>Woolsey and others, however, said employer tactics threatened employee voting rights. She said worker organizers face a one-in-five chance of getting fired for their pro-union stance.</p><p>Several people who appeared toward the end of the forum described incidents of intimidation, harassment and propaganda during organizing.</p><p>Ray Messier, president of the Amalgamated Transit Union in San Rafael, which represents Petaluma transit employees, said extreme and blatantly illegal union-busting techniques are real.</p><p>“I find until it touches you,” he said, “you really don’t believe it.”</p>