What companies don't say so much, but are probably thinking, is that unions also mean higher wages for workers and cumbersome rules that will take up managers' time.

Q. Will the act make America less competitive?

A. That's hard to predict. Right now, the United States has some of the most union-unfriendly laws in the Free World. That can be seen as a competitive advantage for companies doing business here. In other western countries, businesses may face limits or restrictions on hiring and firing workers, for example. That makes it harder for companies to respond to changing market conditions. The EFCA could reduce this advantage and increase labor costs.

Q. Why does President Obama say he supports the act?

A. Obama and his advisors note that in recent years, American workers have become more productive -- that is, they generate more money per hour for their employers -- but their wages have not grown along with their productivity. Instead, businesses have pocketed this money. The president's administration figures the act would lead to higher rates of unionization, which in turn would lead to higher wages.

Critics would say he supports the law because he wants political and financial support from organized labor.

Q. What is a "right-to-work'' state?

A. "Right-to-work'' is an anti-union term for an open shop, meaning a workplace where employees can be covered by a union contract but pay nothing for it. In a right-to-work state, the government bars unions and employers from entering into any contract that requires employees to pay union dues or a bargaining fee in lieu of union dues. Business groups say this is a "right to work'' in that employees can earn a living without any requirement that they support a union they may not agree with. Of course, the law also has the effect of weakening unions.

In contrast, "union shop'' states allow unions and employers to sign contracts requiring workers to either join the union or pay a bargaining fee. "Closed shops," in which workers must be dues-paying union members, have been illegal in the United States since 1947.

Q. Would Florida be affected by EFCA?

A. The state could be seriously affected by EFCA. Unions would likely use the card-check provisions to organize workers before management had a chance to react. Hotels and large retailers would be likely targets.

Q. Would EFCA do away with secret-ballot elections?

A. Secret-ballot elections would still be allowed, but unions would likely try to avoid them because it would be easier to organize through card checks.

Q. Have any compromises been proposed?

A. Yes. For instance, U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., has suggested strengthening the National Labor Relations Act in other ways without resorting to EFCA's card-check and binding-arbitration provisions.