An Empirical Assessment of the Employee Free Choice Act: The Economic Implications

A. Layne-Farrar
{"title":"An Empirical Assessment of the Employee Free Choice Act: The Economic Implications","authors":"A. Layne-Farrar","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1353305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), which is pending before the US Congress, would provide for union representation when an employee majority has signed union authorization cards and would create a system of mandatory arbitration if a collective bargaining agreement is not reached approximately 130 days after a union is newly certified. I critically assess the arguments presented for passing EFCA and consider the likely unintended consequences it will generate, should it be passed. I find that while card checks could be expected to increase union membership as hoped by EFCA proponents, EFCA is unlikely to achieve its main goal of improving social welfare, which should take into account possible consequences not only for union members but for all individuals. In particular, my quantitative analysis indicates that passing EFCA would likely increase the US unemployment rate and decrease US job creation substantially. The precise effect on unemployment will depend on the degree to which EFCA increases union density, but for every 3 percentage points gained in union membership through card checks and mandatory arbitration, the following year's unemployment rate is predicted to increase by 1 percentage point and job creation is predicted to fall by around 1.5 million jobs. Thus, if EFCA passed today and resulted in an increase in unionization from the current rate of about 12% to 15%, then unionized workers would increase from 15.5 to 19.6 million while unemployment a year from now would rise by 1.5 million, to 10.4 million. If EFCA were to increase the percentage of private sector union membership by between 5 and 10 percentage points, as some have suggested, my analysis indicates that unemployment would increase by 2.3 to 5.4 million in the following year and the unemployment rate would increase by 1.5 to 3.5 percentage points in the following year.","PeriodicalId":374378,"journal":{"name":"Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1353305","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), which is pending before the US Congress, would provide for union representation when an employee majority has signed union authorization cards and would create a system of mandatory arbitration if a collective bargaining agreement is not reached approximately 130 days after a union is newly certified. I critically assess the arguments presented for passing EFCA and consider the likely unintended consequences it will generate, should it be passed. I find that while card checks could be expected to increase union membership as hoped by EFCA proponents, EFCA is unlikely to achieve its main goal of improving social welfare, which should take into account possible consequences not only for union members but for all individuals. In particular, my quantitative analysis indicates that passing EFCA would likely increase the US unemployment rate and decrease US job creation substantially. The precise effect on unemployment will depend on the degree to which EFCA increases union density, but for every 3 percentage points gained in union membership through card checks and mandatory arbitration, the following year's unemployment rate is predicted to increase by 1 percentage point and job creation is predicted to fall by around 1.5 million jobs. Thus, if EFCA passed today and resulted in an increase in unionization from the current rate of about 12% to 15%, then unionized workers would increase from 15.5 to 19.6 million while unemployment a year from now would rise by 1.5 million, to 10.4 million. If EFCA were to increase the percentage of private sector union membership by between 5 and 10 percentage points, as some have suggested, my analysis indicates that unemployment would increase by 2.3 to 5.4 million in the following year and the unemployment rate would increase by 1.5 to 3.5 percentage points in the following year.
雇员自由选择法案的实证评估:经济意义
《雇员自由选择法案》(Employee Free Choice Act,简称EFCA)正在等待美国国会的批准。该法案规定,当多数员工签署了工会授权卡时,就可以代表工会;如果在工会获得新认证后约130天内未能达成集体谈判协议,就可以建立一套强制仲裁制度。我批判性地评估了为通过EFCA而提出的论点,并考虑了如果它通过,它可能会产生的意想不到的后果。我发现,虽然信用卡检查可以像EFCA支持者所希望的那样增加工会成员,但EFCA不太可能实现其改善社会福利的主要目标,这不仅应该考虑到工会成员,而且应该考虑到所有个人的可能后果。特别是,我的定量分析表明,通过EFCA可能会增加美国的失业率,并大幅减少美国创造的就业机会。对失业的确切影响将取决于EFCA增加工会密度的程度,但通过卡片检查和强制性仲裁,工会会员每增加3个百分点,预计下一年的失业率将增加1个百分点,预计创造的就业机会将减少约150万个。因此,如果EFCA今天通过,并导致工会化率从目前的12%增加到15%,那么工会工人将从1550万增加到1960万,而失业人数将从现在起一年后增加150万,达到1040万。如果EFCA像一些人建议的那样,将私营部门工会成员的比例提高5到10个百分点,我的分析表明,失业人数将在接下来的一年增加230万到540万,失业率将在接下来的一年增加1.5到3.5个百分点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信