Employers can’t talk politics?

In a masterpiece of cynicism, American labor unions have come up with a scheme to bypass those federally supervised, secret ballot elections they keep losing ... and dubbed it the "Employee Free Choice Act"!

What the unions want is for their organizers to be able to corner workers when they're alone -- in a break room, in the darkened company parking lot -- and "convince" them to sign a card saying they want to be represented by the union. What the unions need to make this scheme work is a new federal law directing that -- once a majority of workers have been so "convinced" -- the union would be declared the recognized bargaining agent, authorized to collect dues to cover "collective bargaining costs" even from those who choose not to join.

The current federal requirement that unless employers agreed to the "card count" system such questions would be settled through a secret-ballot election would be sidestepped.

Democrats favor this change. Arizona Republican John McCain does not.

In fact, labor organizers are rubbing their hands, having been promised that -- if they can help stampede far-left Democrats into the White House and beefed-up majorities in both houses of Congress -- the forced "card-count" system will be near the top of the Democrats' pay-back agenda.

This has raised concerns among the managers of private outfits that support the economy with their investments and taxes, including Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's largest retailer, which has rigorously resisted being unionized.

The Bentonville, Ark.-based discounter has been holding meetings with store managers and department supervisors to warn that if Democrats prevail this fall, they would likely push the bill through.

The unions don't like that.

So Thursday, the AFL-CIO and three other labor-rights groups asked the Federal Election Commission to investigate whether Wal-Mart unlawfully pressured hourly employees to vote against Democrats in November.

Wal-Mart spokesman David Tovar responded Thursday that if anyone representing the company "gave the impression we were telling associates how to vote, they were wrong and acting without approval."

This is a level playing field? It should be labeled "falling rock zone" at the lower end.

It's not unusual, these days, for union locals to "encourage" their members to apply for absentee ballots, and for union bosses to then "help" them fill out their ballots, seal them up, and mail them. If Wal-Mart supervisors had imitated that scheme, we'd agree they've gone too far -- and you can bet the unions would be loudly shrieking "foul."

But so long as voters are free to make up their own minds on election day, casting votes without fear in the secrecy of the voting booth, employers can and should have every right to inform employees of what they see as the likely outcome of supporting any such coercive schemes.

That's called freedom of speech. And it's guaranteed in the First Amendment -- which overrules any "federal election rules" to the contrary.