Bill Would Herd Now-Independent ‘First Responders’ Into Unions
(Source: May 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has sent out an unmistakable signal that he is dead set on pushing through a bill that would undermine state Right to Work laws and soak state and local taxpayers for billions of dollars in additional goverment costs.
On April 12, Mr. Reid reintroduced as S.3194 the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, which was already pending in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee as S.1611.
Mr. Reid’s clear purpose in carrying out this tactical maneuver was to make it possible for him to bring up this federal government union power grab for a Senate floor vote at any time, with as little as 48 hours public notice and with no HELP Committee action whatsoever in advance.
Harry Reid and his cohorts cynically mislabel their legislation, also introduced in the U.S. House as H.R.413 by union-label Congressman Dale Kildee (D-Mich.), as the “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act.”
States’ Bitter Experiences Illustrate Dangers of Harry Reid’s Scheme
But that moniker has nothing to do with reality. S.3194/H.R.413 would institute a federal mandate foisting union “exclusive representation” (monopoly bargaining) on state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.
Reid-Kildee would force countless policemen, firefighters and EMT’s to accept as their monopoly-bargaining agent a union they never asked for or voted for, and want nothing to do with.
It would also constitute a major step towards Big Labor’s decades-old goal of enacting a federal law that foists union monopoly bargaining on front-line state and local employees of all types across America.
“In recent years, the expansion of public-sector union bosses’ monopoly-bargaining empire has become the top challenge to the prosperity of America’s private sector,” said National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.
“Consequently, the states in which government union bosses are relatively less powerful are our nation’s growth engine.”
According to labor economists Barry Hirsch and David Macpherson, as of 2004 fewer than one in four public-sector workers were unionized in 16 states. That same year, more than half of public-sector employees were unionized in 15 states.
From 2004 through 2009, the aggregate real personal income for the 16 states where government union bosses wielded the least power grew by 11.0%, an increase nearly two-and-a-half times as great as the total real income growth for the 15 states with the most public-sector monopoly bargaining.
And real income growth for the lowest union-monopoly states was greater by two-thirds than the national average.
Reid-Kildee Would ‘Replicate California’s Disaster Nationally’
Mr. Mix commented:
“This spring, incredibly, the U.S. Congress is poised to pass, and President Barack Obama is vowing to sign, legislation designed to help government union bigwigs seize monopoly-bargaining control over majorities of public employees in all 50 states.
“To get an idea of where Reid-Kildee could take America, you need only look at California, where nearly 60% of public employees are unionized (compared to 41% nationwide) and government union bosses have for years gotten practically everything they wanted.
“Today, Californians fork over a higher share of their incomes in state and local taxes than residents of all but five other states, but still face unfunded public-employee pension liabilities of as much as $500 billion. Meanwhile, overall income growth in the once-Golden State has fallen well below the national average in recent years.
“Does Congress really want to replicate California’s disaster nationally?”
Reid-Kildee would rewrite the public-sector labor laws of the vast majority of the 50 states to make them more pro-forced unionism.
In states that haven’t caved in to Big Labor demands for monopoly bargaining, Reid-Kildee would federally impose it, denying localities the option to refuse to grant a single union the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who don’t want to join.
And in most states that already authorize public-safety union monopoly bargaining, S.3194/H.R.413 would widen its scope.
Right to Work States Would Likely Lose Key Edge They’ve Had Up to Now
“Employees and businesses in the 22 states with Right to Work laws, which prohibit the firing of employees for refusal to join or pay dues to an unwanted union, would lose a key advantage they’ve had up to now,” noted Mr. Mix.
“As Ohio University’s Richard Vedder, a widely recognized expert in labor economics, pointed out in a recent scholarly article, one important reason Right to Work states typically enjoy superior job and income growth is that a far smaller share of their employees are under union monopoly-bargaining control.
“But Reid-Kildee would facilitate the rapid spread of government union monopoly bargaining in states, overwhelmingly Right to Work states, where it has up to now been rare.
“While this federal scheme does not directly authorize forced dues in states where they are now prohibited, it obviously would reduce the relative attractiveness of the business climates of Right to Work states like Virginia, North Carolina, and Texas.
“Politicians who claim otherwise are either misinformed, or simply lying.”
“Right to Work supporters face an uphill battle against S.3194/H.R.413,” Mr. Mix acknowledged. “In the Big Labor-dominated House, the most we can do is slow the legislation down to buy time. And President Obama has publicly promised Big Labor he will sign the bill into law if he gets a chance.
“Our only chance of victory is in the Senate. That’s why, right now, Right to Work members and supporters are doing everything they can to mobilize 41 senators to sustain an extended debate and keep S.3194 from coming up for a final vote for as long as necessary.”
Being part of three generations of firefighters, police, and military I firmly oppose any national legislation that affects the organization and control of local police, EMS, and firefighters. Keep the national government out! Let the population decide what is best for each area by local resolutions.
I am a very conservative retired police officer. I am also a proud member of the Fraternal Order of Police. I support the legislation. One of the greatest abuses rank and file officers face is an arbitrary discipline system that is rife with poltical influence. The FOP is not a labor union it is a professional organization. We are not the teamsters, we are not Acorn. The police keep order on the picket lines. Maryland FOP Lodges dot compel any officers to join a local lodge. The right to work committee risks alienating a natural conservative ally, the rank and file police officers by siding with Police Chiefs appointed by liberal politicians.
Why do you think this legislation is a top priority of the Fraternal Order of Police? The FOP is the largest organization of police officers in the US. I am a member of the FOP and a staunch conservative. However, after 21 years in the LE field, and being in a RtoW state (Georgia), I have seen the abuses of local government (especially mine) time and time again. I support this legislation because for too long, the police are the floor mat for politicians. We go many years without so much as a cost of living wage increase. Our contribution costs to insurance and our pension keeps going up – effectively driving our take home wages lower. Vacation time (and other time off) is being taken away as the demands for police action is increasing. The local government routinely takes from us and expect us to give and do more, under less than poor working conditions. I have always said to my friends and fellow officers that I am not pro-union in the private sector – but in this area, which I know well, it is needed because we, the officers who day in and day out run towards the gun fight, are not even being fed the scraps that are left over after the politicians feed their pet projects. It is a shame that the police (and fire) have to resort to this – you would think the public gave a s#!+ about us enough to demand fair and equitable treatment – NOT. They are most certainly the first to cry “I pay your salary” when they want to get out of a ticket – but last to stand up for us in our time of need. And to the politicians – we are just a necessary evil. They are the biggest “supporters of law enforcement” and “want the public’s safety to be priority one” when they are trying to get into office – then promptly forget their promises to support us once they make it in.
But then ask yourself, why did unions begin in the first place, did they stem from abuses perpetrated by company’s taking advantage of their employees – I think so. I hope it passes and the local and state governments are forced to deal with us.
Also, you keep harping on “union bosses”…quit with the scare tactics. The police and fire want fair and equitable treatment – that’s all. The FOP is led by current or former police officers who do really care about the treatment of officers. And when it gets down to the local level, the “union bosses” (who will not draw a salary from union dues) will be line level officers or supervisors.
And I am an officer, not some union stooge from the SEIU. Feel free to send me an email and I will verify that I am an officer. (I feel certain you will not publish this – but at least I got this off my chest) By the way, I am addressing this after pulling an 8 hour moonlighting job on my off day. Makes me wonder what I could be doing with my family today if I didn’t have to sleep after working this second job. I bet if I was paid a fair wage, I wouldn’t have to keep these up as much. But you, like the rest of the people who oppose this legislation want your cake – and not have to pay for it.
CY