The House is expected to pass a piece of legislation Thursday that seeks to significantly rebalance the playing field for unions and employers and could possibly reverse decades of declining membership among private industries.
The Employee Free Choice Act would allow a union to be recognized after collecting a majority of vote cards, instead of waiting for the National Labor Relations Board to oversee a secret ballot election, which can occur more than 50 days after the card vote is completed.
Representatives of business on Capitol Hill oppose the bill. The National Association of Manufacturers, The National Federation of Independent Business, the U. S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups oppose the shift away from secret ballots saying the change could threaten the privacy of the workers. “This isn’t about preventing increased unionization it’s about protecting rights,’’ said the National Association of Manufacturer’s Jason Straczewski, of his organization’s opposition to bill. Straczewski says eliminating the secret-ballot step would open up employees to coercion （强迫， 胁迫）from unions.
Samuel of the AFL-CIO contends the real coercion comes from employers. “Workers talking to workers are equals while managers talking to workers aren’t,” Samuel said. He cites the 31, 358 cases of illegal employer discrimination acted on by the National Labor Relations Board in 2005.
Samuel also points out that counter to claims from the business lobby, the secret ballot would not be eliminated. The change would only take the control of the timing of the election out of the hands of the employers. “ On the ground, the difference between having this legislation and not would be the difference between night and day,” said Richard Shaw of the Harris County Central Labor Council, who says it would have a tremendous impact on the local level.
The bill has other provisions （条款，规定）as well. The Employee Free Choice Act would also impose binding arbitration （仲裁）when a company and a newly formed union cannot agree on a contract after 3 months. An agreement worked out under binding compulsory arbitration would be in effect for 2 years, a fact that Straczewski calls, “borderline unconstitutional. ” “I don’t see how it will benefit employees if they’re locked into a contract,” said Straczewski.
The bill’s proponents point to the trend of recognized unions unable to get contracts from unwilling employers. The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, the organization that oversees arbitration, reported that in 2004, 45 percent of newly formed unions were denied first contracts by employers. The bill would also strengthen the penalties for companies that illegally coerce or intimidate employees. As it stands, the law on the books hasn’t changed substantially since the National Labor Relations Act was made into law in 1935. The NLBR can enforce no other penalty than reinstating wrongfully fired employees or recovering lost wages.
1.Which of the following statements best summarizes the main idea of the passage?
2.According to its opponents, the bill（ ）.
3.The word "it" （Line 5, Para. 5） refers to（ ）.
4.People support the bill because of the following reasons EXCEPT（ ）.
5.the bill will strengthen the punishment for companies which illegally coerce or threaten employees
