Faster Labor Contracts Act

Faster Labor Contracts Act
S.844, sponsored by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO)

The Faster Labor Contracts Act is the first bill in Sen. Josh Hawley’s labor framework. It would force union contracts on workers and employers—even allowing government bureaucrats with expanded authority to make these important employment decisions for workers in some instances. It would require negotiation on a contract to begin within days of the favorable union vote and provides that, if an agreement is not reached within mere months, the federal government will step in to engage in mediation and, eventually, binding arbitration.

Within 10 days of receiving a request to collectively bargain with a newly-recognized union, the parties must being bargaining collectively. If the employer and union do not reach an agreement on a first contract within 90 days of the beginning of bargaining—regardless of whether they are negotiating in good faith, and for any reason at all—federal government bureaucrats will intervene to require mediation. This would be an expansion of federal government authority into the private sector and likely necessitate a large increase in employees at the government’s Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS).

If mediation is also unsuccessful within mere weeks, a three-person arbitration panel chosen by the parties will be required to settle the dispute by a majority vote and the decision will be binding. If the parties fail to identify individuals to join the arbitration panel within two weeks, arbitrators chosen by federal government bureaucrats will impose a collective bargaining agreement on the workers, employer, and union.

The Faster Labor Contracts Act doesn’t “support” initial union contracts, rather it could force one-size-fits-all contracts on workers by unelected government bureaucrats. Government-imposed agreements are anything but pro-American worker.

Additional Resources

“What’s Wrong with the Employe Free Choice Act?”
Richard A. Epstein
Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace

“The Case Against the Employee Free Choice Act”
February 4, 2009
Richard A. Epstein
Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace; University of Chicago – Law School

“The Employee Free Choice Act is Unconstitutional”
December 19, 2008
Richard A. Epstein
Cato Institute

Letter: “Interest arbitration provisions of the “Employee Free Choice Act”
February 13, 2009
Seyfarth and Shaw Attorneys

 Report: “Binding Arbitration: A Bad Deal for Workers”
March 5, 2007
James Sherk, Heritage Foundation

 “The Employee Free Choice Act and Binding Arbitration”
July 14, 2009
Shikha Dalmia, Reason Foundation

 “The Employee Free Choice Act’s Interest Arbitration Provision: In Whose Best Interest?”
Bryan M. O’Keefe, Pen State Law Review