NRPLUS MEMBER ARTICLE {C} an unions ignore the outcome of a workplace election? Can workers be forced into a union even if a majority of employees vote against it? Yes to both questions, according to a new and disturbing decision from the National Labor Relations Board. Workplace democracy is dying in darkness.

That’s the reality of NLRB’s ruling on August 25 forcing the company Cemex to begin collective bargaining with the Teamsters. The NLRB, stacked by President Biden with union allies, found that Cemex committed an unfair labor practice during a recent election that the Teamsters lost. Yet the NLRB’s penalty overturns 50 years of precedent. Before, the Teamsters simply would have been given a chance in another election. Now the NLRB has simply given the union automatic control of workers that voted it down.

What explains this antidemocratic decision? The simplest answer is that even an 80 percent election win rate is not enough for unions and the NLRB. In the famous words of early union leader Samuel Gompers, “we want more.” Specifically, unions want to get around the secret-ballot elections that are overwhelmingly popular, instituting a backdoor “card check” that enables union intimidation and deception.

Unpopular unions have now cleared their most formidable barrier to organizing: workers’ having a private vote. Prior to Cemex, unions were free to use “card check,” in which labor organizers get a majority of workers to sign cards supporting unionization. Yet businesses were equally free to reject the cards on the reasonable grounds that card check is unfair and unrepresentative of the majority. Organizers can publicly pressure workers to sign these cards, even coming to their homes and issuing veiled threats. Unions can also give workers the impression that signing the card doesn’t guarantee unionization, but rather an election in which the worker will then be able vote. An election takes place as soon as a business rejects card check.

But Cemex fundamentally changes an election’s impact. Unions are certain to allege that the business engaged in unfair labor practices. If they convince the NLRB, the election results will be thrown out in favor of the initial card check, automatically recognizing the union’s power over workers. Allegations of unfair labor practices are already a matter of course in labor negotiations, yet most are ultimately dismissed or withdrawn. Under Cemex, however, unions will double down on claiming that companies tainted an election, never admitting that workers didn’t buy what the union was selling.

To be clear, businesses should be held accountable if they engage in unfair practices. Yet as the past half century has proved, giving workers a second election is the surest way to respect their wishes. By contrast, the current pro-union NLRB seems likely to rule against even humdrum and harmless business activities, so that unions win more victories and power. Two years of slanted decisions and statements give little hope that the NLRB will be fair. Initial unionization elections look set to become little more than a speed bump on the road to collective bargaining.

A current unionization campaign shows the threat. After losing an April election at a New York City store, the Trader Joe’s United union claimed that management tainted the election. How? By informing their employees about the company’s views on unionization and putting limits on posting union flyers on bulletin boards and break-room tables. The union wants the NLRB to force Trader Joe’s to bargain, yet regardless of whether that happens, unions will take advantage of Cemex and launch a new wave of organizing campaigns, even ones they’d normally lose.

The Cemex decision should be seen for what it really is: A blatant handout to unions — and a blatant assault on workers and job creators. The best answer to the NLRB ruling is the Employee Rights Act, which, among other things, would permanently ban card check and protect workers’ right to a secret ballot. Workers would get a second election instead of being forced into an unwanted union. Businesses and workers are also likely to challenge the NLRB in federal court. They deserve to succeed. If unions want to represent workers, they should win a vote in a free and fair election.