Providing for Consideration of H.R. Faster Labor Contracts Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WALBERG. 5408.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5408, the so-called Faster Labor Contracts Act. I will give credit to whoever named this bill because it certainly accomplishes two things faster: It fast-tracks government intrusion into private workplaces, and it erodes workers' rights faster than we have ever seen before.

Under the FLCA, if the private parties involved do not reach a first contract on an accelerated timeline, a government-appointed arbitration panel steps in and imposes one.

The panel does not merely recommend contract provisions or serve as a neutral entity while parties work to reach an agreement. Instead, it imposes a contract on employers and employees for at least 2 years without their consent.

Let's call this bill what it really is: a massive expansion of Washington's power over American workers and job creators.

It is the latest attempt to put workers under the thumb of Federal bureaucrats. Under the bill, government bureaucrats can parachute into workplaces they have never set foot in, override the voice of the workers and industries they know little about, and leave them with contracts that may not serve their interests.

Mr. Speaker, supporters of this bill assure businesses and workers that it is about worker empowerment and efficiency. I may be misremembering the definition of empowerment, but I can guarantee it does not mean taking away a worker's right to vote on his or her own contract and giving that power to a Washington bureaucrat with no stake in the outcome.

As for efficiency, this bill inserts the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, FMCS, an agency that President Trump rightly sought to eliminate for its corruption into the bargaining process.

Reports came out last year about the agency's alleged mismanagement of funds and other fraudulent activities. Now we are expected to give this agency a role in deciding workers' wages, benefits, scheduling rules, disciplinary procedures, and working conditions whenever contract negotiations extend beyond an arbitrary time frame.

I really doubt this agency will be able to do much, if anything, efficiently. If the bill supporters truly care about efficiency--and I believe they do--this is a strange way to show it.

For more than 90 years, Federal labor law has required employers and unions to bargain in good faith. Despite what supporters of this bill seem to suggest, that system is still working today. Whether it is the Teamsters, UPS, or United Auto Workers and the Big Three automakers, countless agreements across the country have been reached because both sides negotiated compromise and arrived at terms that made sense for their unique workplaces.

Under this bill, small businesses, in particular, could be forced into long-term, expensive, one-size-fits-all contracts written by bureaucrats. Those contracts could mandate spending that small employers cannot sustain, threaten jobs, kill growth, and in some cases, shut businesses down entirely.

Mr. Speaker, simply put, the FLCA is not proworker. It is an ideological Trojan horse that harms the very people it claims to help, empowers bureaucrats over workers, and undermines the collaborative process that has long-defined American labor relations.

Ultimately, workers value having a voice in workplace decisions.

The Trump administration has prioritized putting America's workers first and strengthening the Nation's workforce. This bill goes directly against the President's vision for America: to have the most capable and competitive workforce in the world.

It takes decisions out of the hands of workers and job creators and places them in the hands of unelected bureaucrats.

Mr. Speaker, we do not need government-imposed contracts. We do not need bureaucrats writing workplace rules. We certainly do not need a bill that claims to champion workers while stripping them of their ability to approve contracts that govern their livelihoods, whether they understand that or not.

If Congress truly wants to support American workers, we should strengthen workplace democracy, protect workers' rights, and encourage honest bargaining--not replace negotiation with government mandates.

The FLCA is wrong for workers, wrong for businesses, wrong for the economy, and wrong for the country.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WALBERG. Foxx), the chairman emeritus of the Committee on Education and Workforce.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly respect my good friend and colleague from New Jersey, the sponsor of this bill, and his desire to move processes forward. I just have a significant concern that it is short-sighted to think that government intrusion into this process will ever work in the end and what would be considered optional wouldn't eventually become mandatory in the fact that the workers themselves aren't making these decisions, that the best interests of the union leadership may be carried on, but not the workers'. That is my concern.

Mr. Speaker, we talked about efficiency and moving the issue forward 400-some days, but this bill is being rushed. It is being rushed in other ways. It requires a report from the Government Accountability Office, examining the length of time between recognition of a union in the workplace and the initial collective bargaining agreement. However, that report will not be issued until 1 year after enactment of the bill.

We are passing a bill that could impact millions of employers and employees, only then to request a report to understand the alleged issue that this bill aims to address.

I think back to the 2010 ObamaCare vote, when Members of this body were told to pass the bill so we could find out what was in it. We face a similar question today.

Why must we vote on a proposed solution before we even know the problem? Instead, let us do the reasonable thing before this bill goes to a vote.

That is just something we ought to consider, especially when we have the opportunity to do that, as opposed to pushing this directly to the floor without even having a GAO study beforehand.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WALBERG.

Mr. Speaker, as a former union steelworker, I certainly understand the value that unions play in the workplace. I also understand the value that employers play in the workplace. I sometimes have my concerns about union officials and where they put their greatest agenda items at and the greatest concerns.

Unions can only force workers to pay dues or fees if there is a signed contract in effect. This means that between the time a union is certified and when a first contract is signed, the union is not getting paid to represent workers.

Once the dues spigot is open, nearly all unions funnel that money to opposing President Trump and the Republican Party goals to lower taxes and make the American Dream affordable.

For decades, unions have increasingly spent more of their money on political campaigns--it is part of the record--and fringe social issues with a paltry sum spent on actually representing their members at the bargaining table and fighting for their rights.

From 1990 to 2010, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFSCME, was the second largest political donor on record, but spent 98 percent of its dollars on the other party, Democrats.

President Trump is a strong supporter of Israel, but millions of dollars of union dues from unions like the SEIU, United Electrical Workers Union, and United Auto Workers are going to a pro-Hamas, anti- Israel agenda.

President Trump has fought to get DEI initiatives out of our schools, workplaces, and government agencies. Union money has been propping up that agenda for more than a decade. These are hard truths.

President Trump supports a pro-life policy, but union money flows into Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion organizations.

Union-funded House Democrats have not spent their time fighting for workers like they promise. Instead, they have spent their time undermining President Trump's agenda and trying to get him removed from office. These are hard truths.

The Faster Labor Contracts Act is just the latest attempt to undermine the President and his proworker agenda. It will go to union leadership. They will still be pulling it in while the bureaucrats make decisions for the employees.

I urge colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 5408, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Speaker, through you to my friend from the region where we both grew up, Hammond, South Side of Chicago, Calumet City, steel area and all the rest, I just make one point: Our President is clearly for private sector workers, very much so.

When he dealt with the Federal Government, it follows the pattern of trying to reduce the cost, the size, the scope of the Federal Government. In fact, that is what we are talking about here, of expanding the scope of the Federal Government to come in and force on employees and employers contracts that in many cases they will not have voted on. I just remind my good friend of that.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Speaker, just to bring clarity, my exact words were: President Trump is a strong supporter of Israel, but millions of dollars of union dues from unions like SEIU, the United Electrical Workers, and the United Auto Workers are going to support a pro-Hamas, anti-Israel agenda. I stand by that.

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, this bill asks us to believe that workers are empowered when their right to vote on a contract is taken away and handed to a government-appointed arbitrator. That is not empowerment. That is Washington deciding it knows better in the end than people actually doing the job.

For decades, employers and unions have negotiated contracts through good faith bargaining. Certainly, it is not always easy, but it works because the people closest to the workplace are the ones making the decisions. This bill replaces that process with Federal intervention and a one-size-fits-all mandate.

Congress is being asked to make these sweeping changes without the scrutiny they deserve--no committee process, no serious examination of the costs, and no opportunity to fully consider the consequences.

Workers deserve a voice. Businesses deserve certainty. The American people deserve better than rushed legislation that puts bureaucrats in charge and leaves everyone else with the bill.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I will include a letter at a later time raising concerns about H.R. 5408 from G. Roger King, senior labor and employment counsel at CHRO Association, and Alex McDonald, co-chair of the Workplace Policy Institute at Littler Mendelson.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source