Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Page H770]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROTECTING THE RIGHT TO ORGANIZE
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Torres of California). The Chair
recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Budd) for 5 minutes.
Mr. BUDD. Madam Speaker, tomorrow, the House will vote on the
Protecting the Right to Organize Act of 2019, or the PRO Act. This
legislation is a liberal wish list that represents a draconian overhaul
of our Nation's labor laws at the expense of employers, workers, and
economic growth, while strengthening the authoritarian power of big
labor.
Madam Speaker, despite the fact that the National Labor Relations
Board and the U.S. Supreme Court have recognized that there should be
ample time for ``uninhibited, robust, and wide-open debate in labor
disputes,'' the PRO Act deliberately speeds up election processes so
that employees don't have time to learn about the potential downsides
of joining a union.
Specifically, the bill codifies the provisions of an NLRB regulation
called the ``ambush election rule'' which significantly shortens the
time span in election processes. Democrats purposely inserted this
provision because they know union bosses are more likely to win
elections when employees are uninformed about the downsides of union
membership.
Second, the PRO Act increases liability for businesses by
dramatically expanding the definition of ``joint employer'' to also
include indirect control and unexercised potential control over
employees. These terms are incredibly broad and ambiguous, meaning
businesses could find themselves held liable for labor violations
committed by another business when they might not have even been aware
that they were considered a joint employer in the first place.
Even worse, the risk of increased liability incentivizes large
businesses to stop contracting out to small businesses. This would
force large businesses to keep more jobs in-house which, ultimately,
raises prices for both businesses and consumers.
The expanded definition of joint employer is also detrimental for
franchise businesses. A recent study showed that the definition change
has led to a 93 percent increase in lawsuits against franchise
businesses, costing them over $33 billion annually, and leading to the
loss of 376,000 jobs.
The study also showed that the majority of franchise businesses have
been offering less services just in order to avoid lawsuits. This
chilling effect hurts, again, both workers and consumers alike.
The PRO Act also compels private-sector employees to either join a
union or risk being fired. The bill abolishes the State Right to Work
Laws which allow workers the freedom to choose whether or not they want
to pay fees to a union.
If Right to Work Laws are repealed, not only will unions gain
unprecedented new power, but economic growth and employment will
suffer. A 2018 study by the National Economic Research Associates found
that between 2001 and 2016, States with Right to Work Laws saw private-
sector employment grow by 27 percent; while States without Right to
Work Laws grew only 15 percent.
To top it off, the PRO Act strips workers of their right to cast
anonymous ballots in union elections. Under current law, workers are
able to anonymously oppose joining a union by casting ``secret'' and
unpublicized ballots. However, this PRO Act abolishes this practice and
forces employees to make their choice public about unionizing, which
makes it easier for unions to intimidate and threaten workers who do
not wish to sign up.
Senior fellow at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, Vincent
Vernuccio, has said: ``The secret ballot is a bedrock principle of
democracy. It allows people to vote the way they feel without fear of
reprisal. Without it, those who hold the elections would hold all the
power.''
This bill should be opposed by anyone who is concerned with worker
freedom and continuing our country's economic boom. The PRO Act needs
to be permanently benched.
____________________