The Practical Case Against the “PRO Act” — Card Signing

Foundational to any election where voting takes place, it is imperative that the voters have all the information they need to make informed, thoughtful decisions on the issues they are voting on.  An informed electorate provides for good governance and context in determining whether a specific workplace would benefit from being unionized.

Similar to what we’re witnessing in our national politics, unions are engaging in voter suppression tactics with a goal of creating an ill-informed, confused electorate, which in turn disenfranchises many of the voters.

As with the “Big Lie” about our Presidential election being stolen, unions have promoted a big lie around card signing, stating the cards indicate the true intentions of how employees feel about unions.  As all of us who have been involved with union card signings know, many of those employees who sign cards have done so without being fully informed about what unions could do to the organization and the changes that occur once the union is voted in. In addition, many employees who sign cards do not know the significance of cards and sign them only to get relief from the pressure to sign the cards from fellow workers, or in the belief that it only puts them on a mailing list to get more information.  Finally, employees do not realize that a final determination on unionization based on card signing will not provide employees the protection of a secret ballot. If cards are more heavily relied on, we will most certainly see an increase in mental and physical intimidation placed on workers to sign them.