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

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FINE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the so- called Faster Labor Contracts Act.

I used to run businesses. That is what I was good at, and I understand the importance of collective bargaining, but I also know that the process shouldn't be rushed.

Labor contracts are not minor administrative details. These are life- changing agreements. But this legislation imposes rigid timelines and artificial deadlines that could actually hurt both parties.

Negotiations take time because real compromise takes time. Workers deserve the opportunity to organize, consult with representatives, and review proposals carefully.

The current law provides the right incentives for good-faith bargaining, but the Faster Labor Contracts Act does not do that. It does not even promise a quicker turnaround for labor contracts. It just promises that a third party will step in sooner.

The bill gives union workers and employees 90 days to reach an agreement before being referred to mediation and then 30 additional days before going to arbitration. But there is no time limit on the arbitration, which could last for months or even years.

Think about that. The only participants who do not face a deadline under the bill are the arbitrators the government is forcing employers and employees to submit to.

Despite the name of the bill, there is no guarantee the process will actually become faster. There is only a guarantee that workers and businesses may have no say in the final product.

This bill doesn't promise higher wages. It doesn't improve workplace safety. It doesn't strengthen retirement security. It does not protect healthcare benefits. What it does do is place private negotiations on an accelerated timetable that increases pressure on workers to settle before they have fully fought for what they deserve.

This is a bad idea, and I hope that we vote it down today.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source