Obama's Plan to Socialize Health Care

Here's a prediction: Within five years (if not sooner), the U.S. will have full-blown socialized medicine under President Barack Obama.

Now, like many, you might say: Obama's plan doesn't call for socialized medicine.

Well, in response, we'd like to reply: It doesn't need to. However, here's how Obama's plan will result in total and complete socialized medicine.

Obama has a plan that he likes to brag about. You can check it out here on his website. At first glance, the plan sounds too good to be true. Well, that's because it is.

Simply put, here's how the plan will work:

Develop the government plan to cover the uninsured. Companies (and individuals), as Obama like to say, will be able to keep their own insurance plan if they choose.

Obama's Plan: Bleed 'Em Until They Change Their Minds

However--and here's the catch--Companies will have to pick up 100% of the tab for their employee's insurance. Now since most companies today have their employees pick up some portion of their health care costs (usually ranging from 10 to 30%), the cost increases to employers will be astronomical...

...Or, employers can pay 6% of their payroll to "opt in" to the government plan.

Since smaller employers are having a harder and harder time today paying the health care costs for their employees, they'll be the first to opt in to the government plan. Then you'll see larger ones to the same as those larger employers will find the government's plan to be a cheaper alternative (at first), causing them to dump their employees into the government plan.

Here's a pretty good synopsis of Obama's plan:

Obama's economic plan also includes a "pay or play' mandate requiring companies to either pay for health insurance for 100 percent of their full-time employees or pay 6% of their total payroll into a federally designed fund. According to Ralph R. Reiland, "Obama vs Business & Jobs" (Pittsburgh Tribune Review (10/13/2008), small employers currently face average costs of $7,600 per year insurance coverage for an employee with a family. For a small business with thin margins that can afford to cover only 10 of its 50 employees, Obama's full-coverage mandate under the "play" option, at $7,600 per employee, comes with a job-killing price tag of $304,000 per year for the coverage of the other 40 employees.

One key statement in the above-cited article is very telling: Obama's idea is to have the government absorb severe costs, although he has not spelled out the details or where the funds would come from. [Emphasis added.]

Now, like everything else in life, there's no such thing as a free lunch (except if you're a politician, a Big Labor Fat Cat, or a Wall St. exec.), once more workers get dumped into Obama's government plan, the costs will rise. Once that happens, all Americans are going to foot the bill for another failed government plan through higher taxes or bigger deficits.

That's it in a nutshell, folks....How our health care will be socialized through a simple (and costly) "feel good" scheme.

For those of you who might say: Well, what alternative is there? Here's a radical idea for you: Get the government out of health care and open it up to a truly free market--something that hasn't existed in health care since 1964.

In closing, we'd like to offer this in answer to Tom Brokaw's question during the last debate as to whether health care is a "right". In 1993, Dr. Leonard Piekoff gave an address entitled "Health Care is Not a Right." It is worth a read considering that the debate over socialized medicine goes beyond the mere economics to the moral and philosophical question: What constitutes a right?

Note: Although the above address was given in 1993, during the last battle over socialized medicine, it is still very relevant. Since 1993, times have changed and, as socialists (like those Labor Bosses who have been pushing it since we were in unions) argue more vociferously for government to nationalize health care, there seems to be no clear voice on the opposite end of the spectrum.

A Call to Action: It's Not Too Late to Stop EFCA

Dear Readers:

This is a long (but necessary) post to those of you who are interested in maintaining workers' right to vote in a secret-ballot election on the issue of unionization. Please read this in its entirety, as this is not our typical post regarding union news and events, this is a personal note and a call to action…Especially for employers, attorneys, as well as those engaged in the fight to defeat EFCA.

Four things to know before reading on:

First, you should not view this post as anything other than a plea to get you involved with helping to defeat EFCA--the bill that will have longer-lasting impact and wreak more havoc on this nation's ability to compete than the current financial meltdown on Wall Street.

Second, if you are in a so-called "Swing State" and/or a Right-to-Work State (or know someone who is), this is vitally important to pass along:

• Click here for a list of so-called "Swing States" (noted in grey).
• Click here for a listing of Right-to-Work States (noted in blue).

Third, should you choose to post any of the attached posters, we strongly ask that you to get approval from your labor counsel prior to posting or sending. EmployerReport.com assumes NO reponsibility. You are strongly advised to follow your attorney's sound legal advice.

Fourth, it's time to act…
_______________________________
WHILE THINGS MAY LOOK BLEAK, IT IS NOT TOO LATE TO STOP EFCA…

SOME BACKGROUND…

For more than two years, through EmployerReport.com, we have been devoted to trying to educate the public-at-large to the devastating consequences to employers and their employees should Big Union Bosses succeed in passing the Orwellian-named Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA).

We have been doing this on our own time and our own dime. Sadly, though, it would appear our efforts (and those of others) have not been enough. With the election a few weeks away, there are far too many people still ignorant about what this election is really about* and why unions are spending $1 Billion to take over the federal government.

[*Note: On November 8, 2006, the morning after the mid-term elections, we wrote
as our last entry on the Kulture blog that: The November 7th election was about much more than Iraq and the repudiation of George Bush, this election was about the future of American free enterprise. Unfortunately, liberty and free enterprise lost a huge battle in the last 36 hours. To America's employers: You have now been put on notice. If you weren't energized before, you should be now. The future of your company is now in jeopardy and your workers' jobs are in peril.]

Unfortunately, despite our warnings and other efforts since 2006, as well as the excellent educational efforts of a few others, too few people have taken heed, thus leaving our nation vulnerable to the largest and most expensive union organizing campaign ever.

With only a few weeks to go and based on the most recent polling, it would appear that the unions will succeed in gaining control of the White House, as well as a filibuster-proof Senate, making passage of EFCA a near certainty.

Should EFCA get passed and signed into law, you can be assured that many companies will close under the burden of unionization, while others outsource domestically or internationally causing workers to lose their jobs. This, more than anything else, has been what has kept us motivated for these last two years—the reason why we have devoted so much time to posting and educating as many people as possible.

Our Ignorant, Bought-and-Paid-For Politicians…

Last year, two days before the U.S. House of Representatives voted to pass EFCA, I (along with a few other people) had the occasion to meet privately with a Congressman who was (and still is) pro-EFCA.

During the meeting, it was clear that this labor-backed legislator had bought into the unions' propaganda 'hook, line and sinker'. However, when the opportunity arose, I told the Congressman the following:

"Look, if EFCA passes, I will have job security for life," I stated.

At which the Congressman chuckled, "I can believe it."

"However," I continued, "fifteen years ago, I and five hundred other union workers lost our jobs to Mexico and this was prior to NAFTA. The reason I am opposed to EFCA is that will cost Americans their jobs."

The Congressman told us that they (Democrats) knew EFCA wouldn't become law in 2007, because they couldn't get it passed in the Senate and they knew that President Bush would veto the bill. However, he said, it wasn't going away either.

Two days later, the US House of Representatives passed the bill and, thankfully, it got blocked in the Senate.

The Brutal Truth…

Having been called many negative things over the course of my career (some deservedly, most undeservedly), there is one core value that, since leaving the union movement, I have placed above all others—always be brutally honest. Therefore, while this may offend some of the recipients of our posts (if the proverbial "shoe" fits), if this causes some 'friends' to become enemies, so be it: The truth needs to be told…

Too many people (although not all) in the field of labor relations have been too quiet on the EFCA issue. Why? Because most people in the labor relations field know that, if EFCA passes, it will be a boon for business--job security for an otherwise dying profession.

In fact, many in labor relations see "a second renaissance of building the union movement" (as VP nominee Joe Biden stated at an EFCA rally) not as a threat to American free enterprise, but as a means of building their businesses.

While we do not disagree with this assessment, rather than being silent on EFCA (or worse, taking economic advantage of employers' EFCA fears), we've chosen to pursue a different course of action, that of education over exploitation on the issue of EFCA. As we are already probably one of the top five busiest labor relations firms in the country, we already know the course of action that will need to be taken in the eventuality EFCA becomes law.

We know the methodology for the campaigns, the messaging that will need to take place, as well as the best delivery tools. However, we have opted to devote our time, not for what's the most financially lucrative to our firm, but to fight for what's right. We know there are those who profit through the marketing of fear. We, however, chose not to. Instead, we have chosen to devote as much time and resources as possible to fight this job-killing legislation…until the bitter end, if you will.

By now, you may be wondering: What's your point? Well, here it is...

A CALL TO ACTION…

There are too many people sitting on the sidelines and too few people who know what the union agenda is for 2009. Too few people have yet to take any action at all. It's time to take action…

While there are others issues on the union agenda, including nationalization of our health care system, the two issues that may move people at the polls are the possibility that something may kill their jobs, like:

• Enactment of the hallucinogenically-named Employee Free Choice Act
• Elimination of states' right to pass Right-to-Work laws, which would allow unions to require employees in (currently) 22 states to pay union dues or be fired.

Recently, an interesting fact was mentioned on one of the news shows which was that, if only five people in each Ohio district voted differently in 2004, we would have had a President Kerry for these last four years instead of President Bush. Let me say that again: If only five people in each Ohio district had voted differently then John Kerry would have been elected president.

[Yeah, I know, there's probably more than a few of you readers saying right now: 'If only…']

By all accounts (and despite the poll numbers of recent days), this election may be as tight as the one in 2000. In fact, Reuters and others are even ruminating about the possibility of a tie vote for the presidency. However, the presidency, while that's one battlefront, is not the key to defeating EFCA—the Senate is. If the GOP cannot maintain 41 Senate seats, there can be no filibuster to stop the bill. (Note: PA's GOP-in-name-only Arlen Spectre doesn't count.)

HERE'S WHAT YOU CAN DO…

For All Readers: Help Get the Word Out About EFCA and the Move to Abolish Right-to-Work States (both of which are likely to occur if the unions win in November).

As you may or may not know, in addition to millions of unions' dues dollars being spent on TV advertising, unions are sending teams of canvassers to knock on doors in swing states. Unions are distributing 1.5 million flyers and sending 500,000 targeted attack mailers to voters as well.

Well, since we were trained by unions, we felt it only appropriate to deploy the same tactics the unions are using.

Since there are far more union-free employers and employees than those saddled with unions, we believe YOU can have a far bigger impact by reaching a much larger audience. BUT, you need to act:

For Employers: Attached are several documents, as follows:

• Two Posters (in PDF) explaining the Employee Free Choice Act that, following your labor counsel's approval, you may wish to post in your workplace. Note: These posters have been drafted, in color, for 11X17 paper.
• One Poster (in PDF) explaining Big Union Bosses' scheme to eliminate Right-to-Work states that, following your labor counsel's approval, you may wish to post in your workplace. Note: This poster has been drafted, in color, for 11X17 paper.

Focus on Right-toWork States…An Opportunity Missed:

Like EFCA (until recently), too few people are focusing on this as a potential 'wedge issue'.

The potential for eliminating Right-to-Work states will be a very big deal for many workers in those states. As several of the so-called "swing states" are, in fact, Right-to-Work states, most workers in these states value the fact they they cannot be forced to pay a union to keep their jobs. Without become partisan, these workers should be educated on the unions' efforts to eliminate their right to work in order to collect union dues.

While no state should be left to chance, a few of the Right-to-Work states that will be instrumental this year include:

• Florida
• Nevada
• North Carolina
• Virginia

NOTE: In each of the materials attached, we have directed employees to educate themselves by going to EmployeeFreedom.org, MyPrivateBallot.org, and UnionFacts.com…

A REQUEST FOR THOSE OF YOU RUNNING THE ABOVE WEBSITES:

SINCE YOUR RESOURCES ARE GREATER THAN OURS IN THIS SHORT TIME FRAME, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF YOU COULD MAKE AVAILABLE ON YOUR WEBSITES A LISTING OF THE FEDERAL CANDIDATES' POSITION ON EFCA (i.e., "These are the candidates that have pledged to take your to a secret-ballot election away" vs. "These are the candidates that want you to keep your right to a secret-ballot election").

Employees deserve the right to know which candidates are in bed with the union bosses and it would be helpful to have a comprehensive list that can be downloaded prior to the election.

Dear readers, it's up to you to get the word out. We've been doing it for more than two years now and it has been difficult to try to overcome the unions' billion-dollar campaign.

Please help America's employees understand what Big Union Bosses intend for them after the November 4th election.

With Very Best Wishes,

EmployerReport.com

"I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes." -- Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776

EmployerReport.com's EOW: Labor News & Our Conclusion on Obama...

Dear readers:

Although the rain is falling steadily here on the East Coast, several news stories have seemed to make the day much brighter for those employers who value freedom of choice and secret-ballot elections on the subject of unionization and who, like us, are watching the political campaigns closely.

Before we enter the insane realm of the political and why our Friday is indeed a "good Friday" (as yours should be as well), here are some of the union-related news stories we've posted on EmployerReport.com

• The SEIU's War on its dissident members in California is escalating, as Andy Stern & the Gang from DC seek to impose a trusteeship on its wayward local the United Healthcare Workers, and appointing former Labor Secretary (and current octogenarian) Ray Marshall to oversee the trial of its members.


• To make matters worse for the SEIU, earlier this week, one its union bosses, a registered sex offender, was arrested for having thousands of pictures of child pornography in his home. For its part, the SEIU (through a spokesman) stated that the union was shocked and disgusted. [As the good editor over at The Union News deftly pointed out: Perhaps the SEIU properly "vet" its own...]


• In Colorado, JBS Swift is having a heck of a time with its Muslim workers who decided to engage in a "wildcat" strike over their desire to have a mass prayer break to honor the Muslim-holiday Ramadan. In response to the wildcat, the company has terminated about 100 of them. The UFCW has vowed to fight the terminations.

These are just a few of the many stories posted on EmployerReport.com for you. However it's time to turn to the political front...

The Unions $1 Billion Campaign Against America Is Turning...
[And, in our opinion, Why Barack Obama is Unfit to be POTUS]

This morning, our morning started with a smile as we read several stories that we've posted on EmployerReport.com, plus an e-mail from a friend...

• The e-mail from a friend alerted us to a video of Candidate Barack Obama's Vice Presidential pick Joe Biden (also known as the Human Verbal Wrecking Crew) caught on a YouTube video poking fun at a paraplegic at a rally. [You can watch the video here.] This marks the second day this week of Biden Embarrassments for the Obama campaign, as earlier this week Biden himself told an audience that one-time Democratic front runner Hillary Clinton "might have been a better pick" than himself.


• The second item that turned our day even brighter was the USA Today/Gallup poll indicating that Congressional campaigns are now competitive--as opposed to runaway wins for unions the unions.


• The third was the story of a growing sense of doom among Democrats...


• While the fourth is the story of hypocrisy coming from the Obama campaign over its support of the so-called Fair Pay Act (that piece of legislation that eliminates the statute of limitation for pay discrimination claims). It seems that women in the Junior Senator from Illinois' own Senate office (as well as his top campaign advisors) make less than the men in similar positions.

Of course, all of this can be credited to The Sarah Surge.

Over the course of a short 14 days, the selection of a Hockey-Mom-Turned-Small-Town Mayor-Turned-Governor of Alaska has done more to frustrate Democrats and their Big Union Bosses than anything else the GOP could have done.

So, given all of the events of these last two weeks, and especially the reaction from the Left to Ms. Palin's meteoric rise, we've come to a half-in-jest (but somewhat serious) conclusion: Barack Obama is not fit to be President of the United States (POTUS). Here's why:

Never mind that we disagree with the fact that he supports the Orwellian Employee Free Choice Act that will kill countless American workers' jobs. Never mind the fact that he's seems to have no idea that it is business that creates jobs and not unions. Never mind the fact that he wants the government to impose his belief that you are your brother's keeper and that is NOT the role that government should impose on a FREE people. None of these are the reasons why we think Candidate Obama is unfit to be President Obama. For us, it boils down to this:

After nearly 20 months of branding, image making, endorsements from the privileged elite and labor bosses alike, well-delivered speeches to fainting audiences numbering in the hundreds of thousands, the unmitigating lack of scrutiny from the press (and people who should know better), as well as the ability to take down arguably the most powerful woman in Western World--after all of that--Barack Hussein Obama was taken down in one 35-minute speech by an unknown hockey-mom of five-turned-small-town mayor-turned governor.

[Note: If you were not one of the 40 million people who watched the speech you can view it in its entirety here]

You see, no matter who John McCain selected as his VP candidate, the criticism from the Left was expected to be sharp. However, with Sarah Palin's pick, the reaction went from the expectedly sharp to Barack Obama's condescendingly self-aggrandizing dismissal of Sarah Palin to CNN's Anderson Cooper to the hysterical and insultingly shrill claim from South Carolina's Democratic Chairwoman Carol Fowler that "Palin's primary qualification is that she hasn't had an abortion."

You see, here is our theory: If all it takes is a 35-minute speech to eviscerate and reduce the man who has trademarked "Hope" and "Change," the guy that the entire Left (from Democrats to Socialists to Anarchists) has endorsed to a biting, sexist, and condescending babbling boob, then he really is unfit to be POTUS.

If, after His Styrofoam-columned coronation in Denver the week before left the Anointed One seemingly invincible and omnipotent, it only took one-35 minute, well-delivered speech, to knock him off his mile-high perch and expose his glass jaw, it leaves us to question: If someone as simple and down to earth as Sarah Palin can take you down, what chance do you have against Vladimir Putin?

...Or, to put it in the same crudely sexist terminology that the Left seems to be desirous of using:

DUude! YOU GOT YOUR A** KICKED BY A CHICK!!!

The media is beginning to say this week that "Palin has gotten into Obama's head." Really?

Was it that easy? A fresh face and a fresh speech to knock him off his game, to maul his mojo?

If that's the case, then how will the free world fare when someone really wants to 'get into his head'? [Hopefully, Mr. Obama doesn't smoke cigars like the last Democratic president did.]

Oh...one other thing...In answer to the question going around the media this week: Was the 'Lipstick on a Pig" comment directed at Palin? Yes, it was. Anyone who knows about writing speeches should recognize that the comment (regardless of the context it was put in) was a barb meant to poke fun at Palin. The problem is, it backfired.

And THAT, dear readers, is our take on the State of our Nation this Friday...

We hope you have a truly wonderful week's end and, for those of you friends and clients who are in the path of Hurricane Ike, PLEASE STAY SAFE.

Until next week.

Machinists' Union Flip-Flops and Endorses Barack Obama

In another example of today's union bosses' sleaze*, today's tepid endorsement of Barack Obama by the International Association of Machinists seems to be more about endorsing the "silver tongued orator...the man in love with the microphone" than telling Americans how the union really feels about Barack Obama.

For, if honesty were an issue for the Machinists' union bosses, based on their earlier animosity toward the Annointed One, they should have offered a simple "present" when asked of their presidential pick for November.

You see, it was only several months ago that the Machinists' Big Boss Tom Buffenbarger argued that Barack Obama was merely a 'thespian' who abandoned Maytag and United Airlines workers.

You can read the transcript here...

Or watch the video of 'Blowhard Buffenbarger' below...



Now, contrast the above (which is something of an unintential endorsement McCain's abilities over Obama's) to the comments contained in today's statement:

While our no holds barred support for Sen. Clinton might seem to preclude shifting our allegiance to another candidate, we are prepared to support Sen. Obama with the same enthusiasm and the same determination with which we backed Sen.
Clinton.

The difference between Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama is nearly invisible when compared to the differences between Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain.

Apparently those differences were visible a few months ago when Buffenbarger compared Obama to “Janus, the two-faced Roman god of ancient times” and his followers "latte-drinking, Prius- driving, Birkenstock-wearing, trust fund babies."

Today's the IAM's endorsement of B.O. may seem disingenuous to some (including us). However, the Grand Poobahs over at the Grand Lodge must figure it's okay to back 'two-faced' candidates, so long as they get a commitment to support the no-vote union bill, the Employee Free Choice Act.

You see, to today's unions, principles and having the courage to stand by them is okay..unless that stands in the way of money going to the unions' treasuries.

*And that, folks, is sleaze.

Breaking Union and Political News from 30,000 Feet

This week is starting out to be another interesting week for Americans who follow labor relations in the US of A...

• Late this morning, following a news story that United Airlines leaders claimed to be 'untrue,' shares of UAL dropped 60%, prompting trading on those shares to be halted.


• Over at Boeing, as we alerted you to late Friday night, 27,000 union workers have taken to the streets, halting production and affecting suppliers nationwide. The union claims to be ready for a long strike.


• In Ohio, union-backed groups, fearing a negative backlash against Barack Obama, have taken paid family leave off of the state's November referendum ballot.


• On the political front, Senator John McCain and Hockey Mom-Turned-Alaska Governor-Turned-VP Candidate Sarah Palin have moved ahead of Barack Obama and (Men's Hair Club customer) Joe Biden in the ever-important political polls for the first time ever...This, like a big purple pill, has added a bit of a bounce to Candidate McCain's stump speeches and has even prompted one feminist writer to argue for the newly-minted dynamic duo...all as Palin's pastor urges prayer for the media.


• And, as if the news couldn't get any worse for the United Auto Workers (aka the Union of Ailing Workplaces), it seems that the union's golf resort is bleeding cash...to the tune of $23 million over the last five years. [That's right, the UAW owns a golf resort--bought and paid for through its (now-unemployed) members' dues.]

For these, and many more stories, including the SEIU's ongoing battle with its own members in California, be sure to go to EmployerReport.com

Best wishes for a productive and prosperous week!

Obama's & The Dem's Union Agenda (...a partial list)

In the not-too-distant future, when workers begin to wonder why, after falling for Barack Obama's rhetoric and electing he and his fellow union-controlled Democrats to control our federal government, the economy tanks even further and more jobs are lost, they need only to look back at all the "feel-good" bills that Obama and his cronies are pushing today--all of which will have a seriously negative impact on companies and their ability to maintain (let alone) create jobs.

To that end, dear readers, here is a partial list of the legislation that has already been introduced (or is being pushed) that employers should expect to see enacted if Obama wins and the Democrats obliterate the GOP in the Senate to the point their is no ability for a GOP filibuster:

• Employee Free Choice Act (no-vote unionism and binding arbitration 120 days after unionization)
• Elimination of Right-to-Work states (making all 50 states forced unionization states)
• Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (eliminates statutes of limitations on pay discrimination claims)
• Healthy Families Act (mandates seven paid sick days for employers with more than 15 workers)
• Expanding FMLA to include parenting responsibilities (i.e., parent-teacher conferences) and literacy training
• Arbitration Fairness Act (eliminates PRE-dispute arbitration agreements)
• Public Employee-Employer Cooperation Act (unionizes EMS, Fire & Police at the local and state levels)
• WARN Act expansion to smaller companies
• ADA Restoration Act (expands the definition of disability)
• Protecting America's Workers Act (increases penalties--to include prison time--for employers guilty of "willfully" OSHA)
• Legalizing undocumented workers...and, of course,
• Nationalization of America's Health Care System

Note: The above list is a partial list that encompasses only that which we know about today. Obviously, this doesn't include the tax hikes that Barack Obama has promised to inflict on America.

Recently, we have heard that the cost to fulfill Barack Obama's campaign promises may be higher than $800 billion, an amount that Mr. Obama says he can save by reducing the amount America is spending on our military.

We do not believe that the $800 billion price tag accounts for the amount of company closures and subsequent unemployment that any of the initiatives listed above will cost America or her workers.

________________

Editor's note: If there is any bright side to this insanity, it is that it should only take two years of Democratic control (compared to GWB's eight) and economic malaise before the ensuing public backlash causes another wave of "hope" and "change" from the electorate. [Can anyone say: Sarah Palin for Prez in 2012?]

The Effects of EFCA Begin...

For more than two years, we have called the job-killing legislation which unions and their lackeys have dubbed the Employee Free Choice Act the Kill American Jobs Act--and with good reason: If enacted, EFCA (through its no-vote unionism and mandatory arbitration provisions) will cost many Americans their jobs.

Why? Here it is in a nutshell:

...And it really is this simple:

Unions cost companies more all the way around. While some of the costs are attributable to higher wage and benefits costs (in some cases), the hidden--and often more costly--costs of unionization come from the "administrative" costs attributable to unionization. These administrative costs include higher legal fees, loss of managerial time, overly burdensome work rules, adversarial relationships which result in lower productivity, and the like. These higher administrative costs can easily (and most often do) equate to double-digit costs to a company and, if that company is in any industry that has competition (which one doesn't?), the unionized company becomes less competitive. When a unionized company becomes less competitive, the company must find a way to become competitive again (e.g, outsourcing) or it either shrinks (and lays off its workers) or it goes out of business.

The Law of Unintended Consequences Strikes Again. Now, as union bosses spend $1 billion on the November election to have their political lackeys pass the hallucinogenically-named Employee Free Choice Act, employers have finally awoken and are taking notice. As a result, as we've known for a while now, some companies are not waiting for EFCA's deleterious effects to take hold, they are either altering (or planning to alter) their business models now.

Case in point: Last week, in a discussion with a client's HR manager in the Northeast, the HR manager mentioned that area businesses have already begun planning for EFCA to become law by outsourcing to their workforces to temporary agencies. Since these were primarily warehousing jobs, they do not necessarily lend themselves to outsourcing overseas. However, there are a plethora of companies that provide temporary workers who can easily pick and pack and who, while the per hour cost may be slightly higher, the agencies that employ these temp workers are not unionized.

While unions may cry foul at this approach, they had better get used to it once EFCA passes.

The fact is, the ideas behind EFCA (especially its binding arbitration provision) are not new. In 1994, President Clinton's Dunlop Commission (you can read an analysis of the commission report here) called for such changes to appease union complaints of a declining union movement and their failures in the private sector. However, EFCA (or whatever its predecessor bill might have been named) never came to fruition due to the Republicans' gaining control of Congress in the 1994 mid-term elections.

Twelve years later, on the evening of November 8, 2006, as the last blog entry we posted on Kulture's blog (before blogging exclusively here), we stated that the mid-term elections of 2006 had nothing to do with Iraq and everything to do with unions taking over Congress. Well, the union bosses have done it and on March 1, 2007, the unions got their puppets in the House of Representatives to pass EFCA. However, they knew it would never fly until they changed the make up in the Senate and the occupant in the White House.

Now, a mere two years later, union bosses are poised to complete their coup d'etat in 2008. Unfortunately, it is ordinary Americans that will suffer more under the effects of EFCA, as more and more companies look to shed themselves of the economic costs and risks associated unionization.