An op-ed in Business Week magazine this week gets right to the point: the hostility that Big Business has towards the Employee Free Choice Act is downright short-sighted and bad for business. Two business professors - Paul Adler of USC and Donald Palmer of UC Davis - lay out why businesses should support the Employee Free Choice Act.

"...as a simple matter of ethics, businesses have an obligation to consider the interests of the various stakeholders that support them. A common view in the business community is that the only stakeholders who merit special consideration are investors, because they're the only ones who bear real risks; others--employees, customers, suppliers--are directly compensated. But this is false, especially when it comes to employees."

There's so many good points, we want to pull out a few more for you.

On sustainability and security:

"A common view in the business community is that responsibility for this social environment is government's, and that businesses' responsibility should be limited to obeying the resulting laws and regulations. But this flies in the face of two business realities...business plays an active role in shaping public policies.

"When the lowest-paid workers...are assured higher wage levels and greater employment security, the families of these workers--and, most important, their children--live better, more economically secure lives. Again, unions provide the most effective mechanism for protecting workers' compensation and security."

"Unions typically boost rather than hurt business productivity. [...] Higher wages translate into lower turnover, which means less waste in recruiting, selecting, and training people to replace departed workers. Lower turnover, in turn, makes it economically rational for a firm to invest in worker training, which makes the workforce more productive.

"Many in the business community are not blind to these benefits, but they still fear that more robust unions will cut into profits and thereby slow down investment and growth. [...] Within the U.S., there is no correlation between unionization and the probability of a firm's failure, and looking around the world, there is no correlation between the extent of unionization and aggregate rates of growth."

New analysis of lobbying disclosures shows that the corporate lobbying effort against the Employee Free Choice Act is being waged largely by industry trade associations and front groups rather than by individual companies. (PDF of this report here)

Indeed, when several of the companies that have been active against employee free choice have come under criticism, they have been quick to issue statements to distance their firms from any anti-worker position.

At a time when a majority of the public favors the Employee Free Choice Act and millions of Americans are struggling while high CEO pay and corporate bonuses persist, it appears that companies are reluctant to be out front themselves against a measure that would ensure workers the freedom to gain a voice on the job for improvements.

Instead, the dirty work is being done primarily by eight business associations that are together waging a massive assault against the bill while most of their member companies keep their own names clean.

Industry associations take the lead

• The following eight trade associations were among some of the biggest spenders in lobbying against the Employee Free Choice Act in 2008: U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, National Restaurant Association, Food Marketing Institute, Financial Services Roundtable, Business Roundtable, Retail Industry Leaders Association, and American Hotel and Lodging Association.
• Yet the officers of these associations have largely remained silent on Employee Free Choice. Out of 37 companies which hold leadership positions on the boards of the eight industry associations above, only 8 have ever independently lobbied on the Employee Free Choice Act and representatives from only 11 have made statements on Employee Free Choice.
• Even more striking, less than 4% of the more than 1,500 companies associated with the eight industry associations have ever independently lobbied on Employee Free Choice.
• While individual companies outspent trade associations in lobbying against the Employee Free Choice Act and other pro-worker legislation in 2007, in 2008 trade associations surged ahead, filing lobbying expenditure disclosures which mention Employee Free Choice totaling $141 million ⎯ $36 million more than individual companies.

Individual companies take cover

Burger King
"Burger King Corp. (BKC) believes unions serve a purpose in some workplaces and a number of its guests, vendors and franchisees have positive union membership experiences. BKC is not anti-union. BKC and its franchisees serve a diverse consumer base and, therefore, aim to remain neutral on political issues." (Source)
⎯ Statement issued February 20, 2009 after report, video, and protests exposed efforts by Burger King to defeat the Employee Free Choice Act and shed light on other poor employment and consumer practices at the fast food company. Burger King is a member of the National Restaurant Association and the National Retail Federation.

Principal Financial
"Contrary to incorrect reports issued today, The Principal Financial Group has not taken a position on the Employee Free Choice Act, nor do we plan to take such a position. The Principal represents the interests of millions of employees and hard working Americans who participate in its employee benefit plans; as well as 35,000 employer clients, 42,000 retirement plan sponsors and its own 15,000 employees. ... We have been a frequent advocate on issues of critical importance to unions and the financial services industry, such as civil rights and pension plan funding."
(Source)
⎯ Statement issued on February 24 after Change To Win Chair Anna Burger sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner asking that Principal Financial not be considered for federal TARP money given the company's lobbying disclosures showing $2.4 million in federal government lobbying expenditures in 2008 across many issue areas, including employee free choice. Principal is a member of the Financial Services Roundtable.

McDonald's
"We regret our internal effort to keep our franchisees informed on all aspects regarding this legislation has been leaked to the press and mischaracterized as an anti-union campaign. This was not our intent. McDonald's is not engaged in an anti-union campaign. In fact, we pride ourselves on being the restaurant organization for all people -- especially during tough economic times like these. As such, we try to not take sides in political issues, because we know our customers come from all walks of life, and represent diverse opinions and backgrounds."
(Source)
⎯ Statement issued on December 22 after reports leaked that McDonalds Corp. had urged its franchisees to "contact your U.S. senators and representatives to oppose" the Employee Free Choice Act.

Key facts that may be contributing to the companies' strategy to oppose employee free choice through trade associations and distance themselves

• Today average CEO pay is 344 times higher than average pay for workers. In 1980, CEO pay was 42 times higher. In other words, the average CEO today takes home as much in one day as the average worker is paid in a year.
• By next year, median household income is projected to drop to a level lower than it was 10 years ago.
• 73% of adults favor passage of the Employee Free Choice Act (Hart Research Associates, 12/08)

Lobbying Machine
At-a-glance numbers on the combined lobbying forces of the Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, National Restaurant Association, Food Marketing Institute, Financial Services Roundtable, Business Roundtable, Retail Industry Leaders Association, and American Hotel and Lodging Association:

• Spent $138.4 million on lobbying in 2008 ($258,000 per member of Congress). All 8 groups lobbied against the Employee Free Choice Act.
• Hired 44 lobbying firms in 2008 (359 total lobbyists including both firms and association lobbyists).
• Used at least 34 different front groups and/or affiliates to push their agenda.
• Lobbied on hundreds of bills last year (The Financial Services Roundtable alone lobbied on 91 different bills; the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's lobbying disclosures fill 641 pages).
• The five associations with PACs gave 82% of their PAC contributions to Republicans from 2000 to 2008.

* PDF copy of report here

In this Washington Post interview, SEIU President Andy Stern talks about Wal-Mart, Obama's many strengths and changing the status quo with Steve Pearlstein, the 2008 Pulitzer Prize Winner for Commentary.

Highlights from the discussion.....Andy Stern:

On Wal-Mart's "Terrible" Moral Leadership

"Wal-Mart, as the largest employer in America, has taken a terrible role as being a moral center. Henry Ford had the understanding that people needed money to buy the car. Wal-Mart's philosophy seems to be if the five Walton family members can make money, we don't have to worry about people buying the car. They are the essence of 25 years of failed economic theory."

"[...] Obama is clear on what he wants to accomplish, and he makes a plan...as I like to say, he works back from victory, rather than from the present forward. And once he's made his plan, he works the plan [without distraction].

"I think Obama has incredible personal skills. I've never seen a better personal organizer...you spend a day watching him on a campaign trail, but more importantly for our members, they got to watch him as a community organizer. This is a person with incredible integrity, he's a good listener and he's smarter than everyone else in the room but doesn't act that way."

"Both labor and business are very stuck in the 20th century. Both do not realize we're living through the third economic revolution in history, and it's far from over. In both cases, people are managing what is and not dreaming about what can be."

On Leading Others to Change the Status Quo

"When you're walking down a road and you know where it ends and you're not happy, you have to go in a different direction.

"We've seen in the auto industry, the pharmaceutical industry and now in investment houses, that challenging orthodoxy sometimes is enormously important--because the consequences of not doing so are even more devastating."

Houston Service Workers' Clinic Provides Model for Labor-Business Cooperation in Other Cities

In a city where one in three residents live without health care, the unveiling of a new clinic in Houston that will offer low-cost, quality care to over 5,300 of the area's commercial office janitors is an innovative step in the right direction.

The new Houston Service Workers' Clinic isa joint project resulting from a groundbreaking labor-business partnership between SEIU janitors and business and community leaders to make health care more accessible for low-wage workers. Launching in early February 2009, the clinic could also provide a model for other cities also struggling with a growing number of uninsured.

The Houston Business Journal provides a few more details on the clinic:

"The Houston Service Workers Clinic will provide primary health care for service workers at a cost to them of just $20 a month, with their employers kicking in $185 a month per worker to cover 100 percent of the workers' treatment."

Healthcare coverage for $205 a month per worker is a cost equivalent to less than one-third of a penny per square foot of rental space in Houston's downtown buildings (where SEIU janitors work every day). The clinic will be staffed by physicians and other health professionals from Baylor College of Medicine, and Cigna Healthcare will provide insurance coverage for medical care beyond what the clinic will offer.

The unveiling of this clinic comes as thousands of Houston janitors celebrate the anniversary of the 2006 month-long strike that put a human face on the city's healthcare crisis. The agreement reached at the end of the month-long strike increased hourly wages for the janitors represented by SEIU, many of whom had been earning as little as $20 a day without benefits. In addition, the five major cleaning contractors involved agreed to offer their employees longer hours, paid holidays, vacation time and health insurance, starting in 2009.

"Two years ago I stood beside the Mayor and told the world 'Houston won big,'" said Mercedes Herrera, a Houston janitor who helped lead the workers' historic strike. "Today we celebrate another victory for Houston families as we open our health care clinic."