As we noted in an earlier posting on this site, the mandatory interest arbitration provisions of the Employee Free Choice Act may be even more troubling than the ill-considered card-check recognition requirement.

Bryan O’Keefe, a Washington, D.C. labor and higher education policy analyst in Washington, D.C. also weighed in on that subject last week in an op-ed entitled: "Labor bill empowers government to set wages, benefits for private workers." Excerpt:

From a practical standpoint, even if the government arbitrators are well-meaning, they are not familiar with the day-to-day operations of the newly organized company, nor do they necessarily have the long-term best interests of the company at heart.

It’s easy to imagine scenarios where arbitrators set unrealistic contract terms that companies cannot afford. And, philosophically, this type of arbitration would represent one of the biggest government intrusions ever into the private sector.

Such compulsory arbitration is also a raw deal for workers because they would not be allowed a secret ballot ratification vote on the new contract terms. Whatever the government arbitrators decide, employer and workers would have to live with it. Workers unhappy with their new contracts would have no recourse.