Really engage union members about the Employee Free Choice Act.  The good news is that most union members will support the Employee Free Choice Act.  But few have heard of it, know what this legislation is about or are familiar with the problems it solves.  For example, only 54 percent of members know companies resists workers' attempts to form unions.  So unions must expand efforts to educate members about the urgent need for the Employee Free Choice Act.

Lead with an economic framework.  Place the Employee Free Choice Act in the larger context of today's economic crisis for working people and how unions improve workers' lives.  This is about the survival of the middle class and the American Dream, not labor law.  A framework on union-busting or broken labor law is not as effective for members - especially in this economic climate.

Tap into member's anger at corporate CEOs.  Corporate executives, more than businesses in general, are seen as the source of many of the economic problems facing workers.  Take advantage of this anger and insert CEOs and their record compensation packages, even when their companies are failing and getting taxpayer bailouts, into your messages when you can.  Point out the double standard of corporations - providing written contracts to CEOs while fighting to prevent workers from enjoying the same protection.  You can also paint the anticipated $200 million campaign by business front groups as examples of CEOs and corporations desperate to block workers from getting ahead.  For example, suppressing unions is part of larger efforts by CEOs to prevent working people from getting their fair share.  These are the same people who oppose the minimum wage, improving your health care, etc.

Give members a clearer sense of their own personal stake in this battle.  Union members will support the Employee Free Choice Act, but often voice an important caveat:  "Don't forget about us."  Share how this will help raise the living standards of today's union members, as well as workers who  become members in the future.  Conveying a "strength in numbers" message is key:  More workers having unions means, collectively, we all have an increased ability to raise wages, improve health care and help stop corporate America's race to the bottom.

Communicate the reality of anti-union campaigns so members see the need for the law.  Even though we do not recommend leading with this message, it is critical to explain the barriers that workers face when trying to form unions.  Most union members never have gone through an organizing campaign, so they don't know how bad it can be for workers.  Union members object strongly to several common illegal and anti-union tactics, especially the firing of pro-union workers (97 percent say this is "unacceptable").

Whenever you can, keep the policy discussion simple.  Fully 84 percent of members are more likely to support the bill when it is described simply as "making it much easier for workers to gain union representation in their workplace".  Very few union members will want or need more detail.  This short summary of the law's purpose, together with highlighting the broader economic benefits it will bring, often will do the job for members.

Majority sign-up is effective, legitimate, direct and fair.  Most of your members never experienced organizing through majority sign-up.  In longer settings, take the opportunity to frame the process in positive terms.  It is an alternative to a company-dominated system that is long, bureaucratic, intimidating and undemocratic.  One of the most convincing methods is to share the name of large national companies that have allowed their employees to organize via majority sign-up to underscore that it works and is mainstream.  And let's be clear:  Despite lies by the opposition, the Employee Free Choice Ace DOES NOT take away any rights workers now have.  It give workers, rather than corporations, the choice on how they will form their union.

Remember:  The Language You Use Matters

It's the Employee Free Choice Act, never "EFCA."    Research confirms that "Employee Free Choice Act" is a very strong name for the legislation.  We lose this advantage by using the acronym.  We must discipline ourselves to use the full name, which reinforces a key part of our message, and never to use variations or acronyms.

It's "majority sign-up," not "card check".  The phrase "card check" has no real meaning to union members or other workers.  However, the phrase "majority sign-up" - while also a new concept - is descriptive and conveys a positive value.  The name reinforces the democratic legitimacy of the procedure, which strengthens our message considerably.

It's about workers wanting unions, not unions getting members.  It is essential that union members (and the public) understand that the Employee Free Choice Act is about workers seeking economic opportunity through unions, not about unions seeking members.

Don't use the opposition's language.  We should never describe the current system as a "secret-ballot election" system.  It puts you in the opposition's frame that obscures the larger anti-democratic nature of anti-union campaigns.  Always describe the status quo as a company-dominated system that denies workers a true free choice.  You don't want to argue this on the opposition's turf, but when someone claims the Employee Free Choice Act takes away the secret ballot, you can respond that this is just plain untrue.  Then immediately get back to our message and don't let yourself get stuck in theirs.

Give members compelling facts and information, not over-the-top rhetoric.  What members want to get from their unions on this issue are facts and information.  Over-the-top rhetoric actually weakens our case.  Examples that cause a negative reaction from members include "our unions are under assault" and "unions...could even disappear".  Instead, give members succinct, compelling messages bolstered by supporting facts and a sense of urgency.

A Shift on How Workers' Stories and Case Studies Can Be Used

Our research underscores our movement's need to shift the type of workers' stories we use for this campaign.  As always, we want workers - union and nonunion - to be the messengers.  But the stories that matter most are those that highlight the economic reasons workers want unions, or the gains achieved from having a union (victory stories:  "thank goodness I have a union").

Showing numbers and scale is important, too.  We need to convey that a large-scale crisis exists.  Use stories that make this case.  For example, highlight the campaigns of hundreds or thousands of workers at a company who wanted a union so they could obtain health insurance.  Or use an example of name-brand, large employer that is fighting its employees (still highlighting the economic consequences for workers, of course). 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Why do we need new federal legislation, the Employee Free Choice Act?  America's working people are struggling to make ends meet, and our middle class is disappearing.  The best opportunity working men and women have to get ahead is by uniting with co-workers to bargain with their employers for better wages and benefits. 

            But the current labor law system is broken.  Corporations routinely intimidate, harass, coerce and even fire people who try to organize unions - and today's labor law is powerless to stop them.  Every day, employers deny working people the freedom to make their own choice about whether to have a union:

·        Employees are fired in one-quarter of private-sector union organizing campaigns;

·        78 percent of private employers require supervisors to deliver anti-union messages to the workers who jobs and pay they control;

·        And even after workers successfully form a union, one-third of the time they are not able to get a contract.

What does the Employee Free Choice Act do?  It does three things to level the playing field for employees and employers:

1.      Strengthens penalties for companies that illegally coerce or intimidate employees in an effort to prevent them from forming a union;

2.      Brings in a neutral third party to settle a contract when a company and newly certified union cannot agree on a contract after three months.

3.      Establishes majority sign-up, meaning that if a majority of the employees sign union authorization cards, validated by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a company must recognize the union.

What's wrong with the current law?  The National Labor Relations Act states:  "Employees shall have the right to self organization to form, join, or assist labor organizations..."  It was designed to protect employee choice on whether to form unions, but it has been turned upside down.  The current system is not like any democratic election held anywhere else in our society.  Employers have turned the NLRB election process into management-controlled balloting--the employer has all the power, controls the information workers can receive and routinely poisons the process by intimidating, harassing, coercing and even firing people who try to organize unions.  On top of that, the law's penalties are so insignificant that many companies treat them as just another cost of doing business.  By the time employees vote in an NLRB election, if they can get to that point, a free and fair choice isn't an option.  Even in the voting location, workers do not have a free choice after being browbeaten by supervisors to oppose the union or being told they may lose their jobs and livelihoods if they vote for the union.

What is majority sign-up, and how does it work?  When a majority of employees votes to form a union by signing authorization cards, and those authorization cards are validated by the federal government, the employer will be legally required to recognize and bargain with the workers' union.  Majority sign-up is not a new approach.  For years, some responsible employers such as Cingular Wireless have taken a position of allowing employees to choose, by majority decision, whether to have a union.  Those companies have found that majority sign-up is an effective way to allow workers the freedom to make their own decision - and it results in less hostility and polarization in the workplace than the failed NLRB process.

Does the Employee Free Choice Act take away so-called secret ballot elections?  No.  If one-third of workers want to have an NLRB election at their workplace, they can still ask the federal government to hold an election.  The Employee Free Choice Act simply gives them another option - majority sign-up.  "Elections" may sound like the most democratic approach, but the NLRB process is nothing like any democratic elections in our society - presidential elections, for example - because one side has all the power.  The employer controls the voters' paychecks and livelihood, has unlimited access to speak against the union in the workplace while restricting pro-union speech and has the freedom to intimidate and coerce the voters.

Does the Employee Free Choice Act silence employers or required that they remain neutral about the union?  No.  Employers are still free to express their opinion about the union as long as they do not threaten or intimidate workers.

Will employees be pressured into signing union authorization cards?  No.  In fact, academic studies show that workers who organize under majority sign-up feel less pressure from co-workers to support the union than workers who organize under the NLRB election process.  Workers who vote by majority sign-up also report far less pressure or coercion from management to oppose the union that workers who go through NLRB elections.  In addition, it is illegal for anyone to coerce employees to sign a union authorization card.  Any person who breaks the law will be subject to penalties under the Employee Free Choice Act.

Isn't this law really about unions wanting to increase membership?  This law is about restoring to working people the freedom to improve their lives through unions.  More than half of people who don't have a union say they would join one tomorrow if given the chance.  After all, people who have unions earn 30 percent more than people without unions and are much more likely to have health care and pensions.  With a free choice to join unions, working people can bargain for better wages, health care and pensions to build a better life for their families.  With the economic pressures on working people today, the freedom to pursue their dreams is crucially important.

Who supports the Employee Free Choice Act?  The Employee Free Choice Act has the support of hundreds of members of Congress of both parties, academics and historians, civil and human rights organizations such as the NAACP and Human Rights Watch, most major faith denominations and 69 percent of the American Public.  (for a detailed list of supporters, visit www.EmployeeFreeChoiceAct.org.)

Who opposes the Employee Free Choice Act?  Corporate front groups are waging a major campaign to stop the Employee Free Choice Act.  They do not want workers to have the freedom to choose for themselves whether to bargain through unions for better wages, benefits and working conditions.  The anti-union network includes discredited groups like the Center for Union Facts, led by lobbyist Richard Berman, who is infamous for fighting against drunk driving laws and consumer and health protections, and the National Right to Work Committee and Foundation, the country's oldest organization dedicated exclusively to destroying unions.