In addition, a little research will shed some light on the mission behind the message. The top two names on the committee's Advisory Board - their personal business interests rely on... You guessed it - unions. Stands to reason that if there were more unions, there would be more business for these two gentlemen. Kind of takes away from the "unions are good for workers AND employers AND America" message that they're trying to send.
I also like this statement, under "Resources" on their web site. Second link down - "Employee Free Choice Act: Good for Small Business." Read the first sentence:
"Businesses that comply with the law face unfair competition from companies who refuse to respect the rights of their employees to join unions."Now, there's a consistent finger-pointing argument related to organization efforts where the employers say the unions use bad tactics and vice-versa. However, if you read this sentence it's a pretty clear admission that having a union can be a competitive disadvantage for an employer. Not saying that's always the case - we have many members here at the Partnership that are union shops and are pleased with their organization. However, if there's a chance that a union can put employers at a disadvantage - as this statement on the "Business Leaders for a Fair Economy" web site states pretty succinctly - why would it be a positive thing for the government to shove unions down their throats with this legislation?
Believe me, I could sit here and write 5,000 words picking apart different pieces of this web site. Bottom line is - I hope our elected reps in Washington are smart enough to see through this. EFCA is a union bill and only a union bill. If it passes, it will be because "special" interests win the day and most certainly not based on the merits of the legislation. The business community is decidedly opposed to it, regardless of what these "self" interests say.