This article out of Washington State points to two strategies working against American businesses and workers. Interestingly, the focus of this article is actually on the less alarming of the two.
Apparently, a veteran official of the Washington State Labor Council wrote a memo outlining possible strategies to pursue this week in hopes of getting a vote on a new piece of union-friendly legislation. The email was sent to a number of labor leaders, and copied to four lawmakers. One of the strategies equated to a threat to withhold future campaign funding for members of the congress that went against Big Labors wishes. It is possibly a violation of regulations that state that
lobbyists cannot exercise “any undue influence, extortion or unlawful retaliation on any legislator by reason of the legislator’s position with respect to or vote upon any pending or proposed legislation.”
All of the above is typical union tactics, just your average pay-to-play at work. The more sinister component that is almost overlooked by the article is the nature of the bill being proposed. The bill is called the “Worker Privacy Act,” (Senate Bill 5446, and House Bill 1528), and the bill
would prohibit an employer from requiring an employee to attend a meeting, or listen to, respond to, or participate in any communication relating to political, labor or religious matters. This would include talks about unions and charitable giving.
Whoa! Another blatant attempt to curtail free speech rights, couched in the politically correct jargon of “Worker Privacy.” And, another sly move by Big Labor to tighten the noose on American businesses, taking the fight to the state level in case the Employee Free Choice Act flounders on the national stage, or is compromised to lose some of it’s teeth.
The major ingredient to management winning a union election (beyond positive employee relations practices) is the ability to communicate the benefits of a direct relationship between an employee and his employer, and to provide truthful information about union operations and the collective bargaining process (as opposed to the union organizer’s promises). Although meetings are not the only way to communicate, it is perhaps the strongest tool in the tool box, because management can control the timing, gauge the feedback, and insure all employees participate. There is no way to force an employee to read a flyer or a web site.
I expect to see similar legislation popping up in state congresses all over the country. American businesses better be prepared to take the fight to the state level. Secondly, they should take a proactive stance in how they communicate to their employees about union-related issues. It is no longer a valid strategy to ignore union issues until organizing activity is detected. I heartily recommend starting now to create other communication vehicles that employees want to access, such as company newsletters, white papers or booklets, or employee-centric web sites. If you need help developing the content, or even the vehicle, feel free to contact us – we’ve been doing this for over 25 years.
