An editorial by the Washington Post today, entitled:"A Balance for Labor: A House bill on union organization goes too far" argues against card-check but for changing the status quo:

One of labor's contentions is that the existing enforcement system is so weak that only the most committed, if not foolhardy, workers will take the risk of trying to organize. That grim assessment may well be accurate, in which case one answer that we would support is contained in the House-passed legislation: beefed-up penalties for illegally firing employees and higher fines for employers who deliberately interfered with employees' organizing rights.

Another argument is that existing law and legal interpretations leave employers free to browbeat, if not threaten, captive audiences of workers considering forming unions; in the meantime, labor is relegated to standing outside the factory gates or workplace doors. Here, too, we think there is room for creative legislative solutions. Some Canadian provinces, for instance, minimize the time within which an election must be held to reduce the threat of intimidation or coercion. So does a new British labor law, which also requires that unions get a chance to make their case to employees in the workplace.

The editorial has open comments and should generate some interesting discussion.  Here are a few early comments taking issue with the Post:

• Another dishonest piece from WaPo editorial page editor and neocon Fred Hiatt. Donald Graham, have you no sense of decency?
• To say that the so-called card-check arrangement would give labor too much power to spring unions on employers . . . . is laughable and shows the Washington Posts ignorance in labor matters.
• The Washington Post has shown its true, anti-union colors, through this editorial. Strikingly absent from the editorial is the fact the Washington Post has treated its own union, the CWA, with contempt. In fact, the Post refused to bagain in good faith with its mailroom employees, refusing to give them a raise in four years. Readers should not forget for one minute that the Post is a huge multi-billion dollar corporation that makes money like any other corporation - off the backs of its workers. The Post has no credibility on labor issues and it should keep its editorial mouth shut.
• The Post has lost its soul. I can only guess what the twenty pieces of silver were that would cause the Post to sell out to the corporate elites. It must have something to do with the fact that it is corporate elites that make up her board and they must be influencing the editorial board.