On March 4, Sens. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, Corey Booker, D-N.J., Gray Peters, D-Mich., and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., introduced the Faster Labor Contracts Act.

ABC and the ABC-led Coalition Democratic Workplace released statements opposing the bill.

The Fast Labor Contracts Act is a part of Sen. Josh Hawley’s Pro-Worker Framework for the 119th Congress, a labor policy legislative framework that includes sections of the ABC-opposed Protecting the Right to Organize Act and Warehouse Worker Protection Act, including language on ambush elections and banning so-called captive audience meetings. ABC opposes this framework, joining with 42 other members of the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace in a letter and with the Coalition for Workplace Safety in a second letter urging the U.S. Senate to reject it. 

ABC believes that the Faster Labor Contracts Act, which will lead to the federal government controlling private sector contracts, is the worst provision of the framework. The bill would require employers to finalize negotiations with newly elected unions or face “binding interest arbitration of first contracts.” In practice, this means that a federal government bureaucrat will dictate exactly what is included in the first contract. Wages, benefits, safety procedures, paid time-off questions and every other aspect of workplace policy for a newly organized workplace will be imposed by the federal government’s designee. This government edict “shall be binding upon the parties for a period of two years.”

This legislation, which was previously included in both the ABC-opposed PRO Act and Employee Free Choice Act, would violate the U.S. Constitution. Mandatory arbitration would deprive both employers and employees of property rights without the requisite due-process safeguards. The arbitrator could force an employer already working on thin profit margins to spend thousands of dollars to overhaul their facilities, change subcontractors or alter promotion policies without any judicial oversight. Similarly, the arbitrator could cut the wages of employees without any consideration of legal fairness. Simply put, this bill could mandate a lose-lose contract on both the employer and the employees.