Committee Defeats Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Legislation

With the long-anticipated conclusion of the 111th Congress a few weeks ago, National Right to Work Committee members and supporters achieved a major legislative victory that had seemed a near impossibility at the Congress’s inception in 2009.

Just before Christmas, Congress adjourned without having rubber-stamped Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) so-called “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act” (S.3991).

This was government union bosses’ “top legislative priority” in the 111th Congress, as International Firefighters (IAFF/AFL-CIO) union czar Harold Schaitberger admitted mournfully after the adjournment.

Seasoned Capitol Hill observers had confidently predicted the Reid legislation would pass into law before the end of 2010, and with good reason.

At the outset of the 2009-2010 Congress, the votes were there to pass the bill in both chambers of Congress. Furthermore, President Obama was publicly vowing to sign it as soon as it reached his desk.

The only possible hope of blocking the government union power grab was a Senate filibuster — and mustering the 41 votes needed to sustain one seemed to be a long shot at best.

Nevertheless, from the beginning, Committee members and supporters were ready to fight to the hilt, because the stakes were so high.

‘Already Strong Lobby’ Sought Even More Power

S.3991, referred to unofficially, but accurately, as the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, would have empowered Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) bureaucrats to survey all 50 states and identify which had failed to meet the legislation’s “core standards.”

And the key “core standard” was mandatory union monopoly bargaining. Localities in all 50 states would have been denied the option to refuse to grant a single public-safety union the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who didn’t want to join.

Monopoly bargaining, euphemistically labeled as “exclusive representation,” would have been foisted on police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide. And in most states that already authorize public-safety monopoly bargaining, this legislation would have widened its scope.

As Wall Street Journal reporter Kris Maher noted late last spring, under legislation like S.3991, if any state had refused to institute monopoly bargaining and comply with other mandates, FLRA bureaucrats would have implemented them themselves.

Sen. Reid personally introduced two different versions of the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill. In April 2010, Mr. Reid sponsored S.3194, a bill he could bring to the floor at any time, without any preliminary committee action.

And during the “lame-duck” Senate session late last year, he introduced S.3991, a modest variation on his earlier measure crafted to garner more support through its exemption of sheriffs’ departments from the federal monopoly-bargaining mandate.

Yet another Senate version of the Police Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill was sponsored as S.1611 by Big Labor appeaser Judd Gregg (R-N.H.). In the House, union-label Congressman Dale Kildee (D-Mich.) introduced companion legislation as H.R.413.

In all its guises, the police/fire monopoly-bargaining legislation was a budget-busting power grab. In an astute editorial last June, the Washington Post summed up why this scheme was so dangerous:

“What this bill would do is impose a permanent, one-size-fits-all federal solution in an area — public-sector labor relations — that has traditionally been left to the states, and where state flexibility is probably more necessary than ever.

“. . . The bill further empowers an already strong lobby . . . .”

Harry Reid Nearly Succeeded Because of GOP Collaborators

Of course, Mr. Reid wasn’t troubled by the intense damage S.3194 and S.3991 would do to taxpayers or by how they would ravage state sovereignty.

The bottom line for him was that this legislation would empower and enrich union officials who are one the Democratic Party’s “most important constituencies,” as the editors of the New York-based biweekly National Review put it.

However, Democratic politicians, despite controlling the White House and substantial majorities in both chambers of Congress, were never expected last year to make the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, in any of its versions, the law of the land all on their own.

Since GOP Sen. Scott Brown (Mass.) took office last February, there were never more than 59 senators in Mr. Reid’s majority caucus. But it takes 60 to bring up a piece of legislation for a final vote if opponents seek to block it by launching an extended debate.

The reason Mr. Reid nearly succeeded last summer in making his pet scheme the law of the land was because six out of the 41 GOP senators were sponsoring S.1611, monopoly-bargaining legislation virtually identical to the Reid bill.

Last July 1, the House monopoly-bargaining legislation sailed through the lower chamber as an amendment to H.R.4899, a massive, unrelated defense spending bill. Union strategists eagerly anticipated the Senate passing the whole measure later that month.

All-Out Right to Work Mobilization Stalled Union Lobbying Blitz

But then, for several weeks in July, freedom-loving Americans mobilized by the National Right to Work Committee contacted their senators again and again, urging them to oppose H.R.4899 on all votes unless and until the public-safety union monopoly-bargaining amendment was removed.

Firefighters union boss Schaitberger personally expressed alarm in an e-mail to union operatives that the “National Right to Work Committee” was “working the phones.”

Several organizations representing the interests of local governments and public-safety departments, such as the National Sheriffs’ Association, joined with the Committee in lobbying against the forced-unionism sneak play.

The message clearly got through to a number of senators who normally vote with Big Labor, but were getting antsier and antsier about their next election.

On the evening of July 22, the Senate voted down the House-passed version of H.R.4899, and then approved a war-spending bill without the monopoly-bargaining provision. Finally, on July 27, a chastened House acquiesced to the Senate’s action, and sent a stripped-down war supplemental to President Obama’s desk.

Of course, Harry Reid didn’t give up at that point, or even after voters ousted two Senate proponents of federally mandated public-safety union monopoly bargaining, Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.), replacing them with 100% Right to Work supporters, in the November 2 general elections.

Right to Work Supporters Continued Turning up the Pressure on ‘Lame Ducks’

On December 8, the “lame-duck” Senate voted on Mr. Reid’s cloture motion to cut off debate by Right to Work proponents so that S.3991, his latest version of the police/fire union power grab, could get the Senate green light, then race through the House and go to President Obama’s desk.

But, thanks once again to intense grass-roots lobbying efforts by Right to Work supporters, Mr. Reid came up five votes short of the 60 he needed to achieve cloture, with three Senate Democrats and half-a-dozen Republicans who had previously supported the legislation voting “No.”

“Right to Work members and supporters nationwide never let down their guard until the 111th Congress adjourned for good on December 22,” observed Committee President Mark Mix. “That is how they pulled off a remarkable victory for independent-minded public servants and taxpayers.”

(Source: September 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

In covering the hard-fought and expensive campaign for the GOP nomination to succeed U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), which concluded early last month, national media pundits missed a major policy difference between the two top-tier candidates.

Primary contenders Todd Tiahrt and Jerry Moran, who currently hold two of the Sunflower State’s four seats in the U.S. House, had both opposed the 2009 “stimulus” package and ObamaCare. And they had virtually identical voting records on the politically charged issues of gun control and abortion.

But there is one policy difference between Mr. Tiahrt and Mr. Moran that proved to be very important to rank-and-file Kansas voters this summer. In spite of the failure of newspaper, TV and radio political reporters to cover this issue during the campaign, it was clearly decisive for the race’s outcome.

For years, Mr. Tiahrt has defied the wishes of his overwhelmingly pro-Right to Work constituents in south central Kansas by cosponsoring and voting for one of the top power grabs on the Capitol Hill agenda of Organized Labor, the #1 pro-Big Government special-interest group in America.

In 2007, Mr. Tiahrt went along with the wishes of the Nancy Pelosi-led House Democratic caucus by voting for the union bosses’ Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill (then H.R.980).

The Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill (now H.R.413 in the House) would impose a new federal mandate ensuring that government union bosses get monopoly-bargaining privileges over additional hundreds of thousands of state and local public-safety employees.

Localities Would Be Denied Option to Refuse to Give Union Bosses a Monopoly

H.R.413 and its nearly identical Senate counterpart, S.3194, would federally impose union monopoly bargaining by denying localities the option to refuse to grant a single public-safety union the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who don’t want to join.

Monopoly bargaining, euphemistically labeled as “exclusive representation,” would be foisted on state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.

And in most states that already authorize public-safety union monopoly bargaining, H.R.413/S.3194 would widen its scope.

“Todd Tiahrt’s record of voting for and repeatedly cosponsoring the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill sent a red flag to Kansas voters that, in the Senate, he would vote for expanding union monopoly control over goverment,” commented National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.

“In contrast, Jerry Moran has consistently supported the Right to Work. He stood up to the Pelosi Democrats by voting against the monopoly-bargaining bill when it came to the House floor in 2007.

“And during this year’s campaign he publicly pledged to continue opposing legislation like H.R.413 in the future.”

During the final weeks before Kansas’s primaries, the Committee broke through the media blackout on Mr. Tiahrt’s pro-forced unionism record by directly contacting over 40,000 targeted households multiple times, and urging them to ask the candidate to change his stand on H.R.413.

Thousands and thousands of pro-Right to Work Kansans responded by making phone calls and sending postcards, letters and e-mails to Mr. Tiahrt’s congressional office and his campaign. But Mr. Tiahrt did not repudiate his advocacy of federally mandated union monopoly bargaining over public employees.

Big Government Is Big Labor’s ‘Bread and Butter’

“If Todd Tiahrt had seen the light, withdrawn his current sponsorship of H.R.413, and apologized for his 2007 vote for very similar legislation, freedom-loving Kansans very likely would have forgiven him,” said Mr. Mix.

“As it happened, he stuck with government union bosses, and ended up losing to his pro-Right to Work rival by 17,000 votes.

“Kansas voters were right to see Mr. Tiahrt’s support for H.R.413 as a problem.

“Over the course of the past few decades, public servants, especially state and local public employees, have become Big Labor’s bread and butter.

“Today, union officials wield monopoly-bargaining power over 43% of state and local government employees, compared to just 8% of private-sector workers.

“And Big Labor featherbedding and counterproductive work rules have sharply increased real taxpayer costs for compensation of state and local government employees.

“No candidate can credibly claim he will fight against the skyrocketing cost of Big Government while supporting police/fire monopoly-bargaining legislation. Todd Tiahrt just learned this lesson the hard way.”

Since forced-unionism cheerleader Barack Obama became President in January 2009, Big Labor bosses and their yes-men in the U.S. Congress have helped him inflict a lot of damage on employees, businesses, and taxpayers across America.

To take just the latest example, last month union puppet politicians in the Senate and House rubber-stamped a special-interest measure (H.R.1586) that will ultimately extract an additional $10 billion from beleaguered private-sector employees and businesses to maintain and expand wasteful unionized government payrolls.

From 1998 to 2007, the number of instructional employees at K-12 public schools nationwide soared by 15.9% — an increase 3.5 times greater than the 4.5% growth in school enrollment over the same period.

The rapid-fire expansion of school payrolls, roughly 70% of which are unionized, produced no measurable improvement in educational outcomes, but cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.

And the terms on which H.R.1586 piles on another $10 billion are expressly designed to ensure that currently strapped states do not pare back the past decade of teacher union boss-driven growth in K-12 payrolls in order to avoid increasing the burden on taxpaying individuals and businesses.

On August 11, just one day after the House had okayed H.R.1586, President Obama signed it into law.

Big Labor Bosses Still Far From Satisfied

But despite having received a host of handouts like H.R.1586 during the past two years, top union bosses remain far from satisfied. They are making no secret about the fact that they think they are still owed at least a few more juicy legislative plums before the end of this Congress.

After all, as union dons never hesitate to remind the Democratic President and congressional leaders, they, more than any other special-interest group, are responsible for giving one political party control of the White House and lopsided Senate and House majorities at the same time.

It’s estimated that, in 2007 and 2008, the union political machine pumped well over a billion dollars, mostly siphoned off from workers’ forced union dues and fees, into efforts to put Big Labor Democrats in firm control of the executive and legislative branches of the federal government.

Consequently, union barons expected to see enacted in the current Congress legislation that would help them sharply increase the share of all private-sector workers who are under union monopoly-bargaining control.

Their original vehicle for achieving this objective was S.560/H.R.1409, the so-called “Employee Free Choice Act.”

Sponsored by Big Labor Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Congressman George Miller (D-Calif.), S.560/H.R.1409 would grease the skids for union-boss workplace takeovers in several ways. Most famously, it would effectively end secret-ballot elections in union organizing drives, replacing them with so-called “card checks.”

That means, if S.560/H.R.1409 became law, union organizers would have far more opportunities than they currently do to intimidate individual workers into signing not just themselves, but all of their nonunion fellow employees, over to Big Labor control.

Right to Work Resistance Has Stalled Power Grab

Unfortunately for union bigwigs, since early 2009 the National Right to Work Committee and its allies have mobilized massive public opposition to S.560/H.R.1409, greatly lowering its prospects for passage in its current form.

In response, for many months now Big Labor lobbyists and politicians have huddled together with the intent of concocting new, passable legislation that would accomplish the same objective through somewhat different means.

Now it seems that their “Plan B” might well emerge in the 2009-2010 Congress — but not until after Election Day!

On August 12, union-label Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) publicly confirmed what freedom-loving Americans have suspected for some time: that he will reconvene the Senate soon after Election Day on November 2. Under his plan, the “lame duck” chamber could remain in session until well into December, with only a brief Thanksgiving recess.

Reid lieutenant Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) has confirmed that the Senate will be considering major policy initiatives, and not just “must-pass” budget bills, after Election Day.

“It may well be we have to wait until a lame-duck session to pass whatever we’re able to pass,” Mr. Bingaman admitted to the Capitol Hill newspaper Politico in mid-August.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has also made it clear she intends to hold a “lame duck” session in her chamber, though she has yet to publicly announce a schedule

“Union bosses from AFL-CIO czar Richard Trumka on down are now reiterating their demand that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi bring up the ‘card check’ bill, or its near equivalent, before the 2009-2010 Congress is over,” noted Right to Work President Mark Mix.

“Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi are desperate to satisfy their Big Labor patrons. But at the same time they want to minimize the electoral damage that voting for this power grab would do to vulnerable union-label politicians in their caucuses. That’s why the Big Labor Democrat leaders lean to the ‘lame duck’ strategy.”

Public-Safety Union-Monopoly Bill Could Also Be on ‘Lame Duck’ Agenda

“And ‘card-check’ forced unionism isn’t the only major rewrite of federal labor policy that may come up in the Big Labor Congress after November 2,” Mr. Mix continued.

“Another strong possibility is H.R.413/S.3194, legislation cynically mislabeled as the ‘Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act.’

“This measure would, at a time when government budget deficits are already sky high, hobble the ability of states and localities to keep their expenditures of taxpayer dollars under control.

“H.R.413/S.3194 would empower Federal Labor Relations Authority bureaucrats to survey all 50 states and identify which have failed to meet ‘core standards.’ And the key ‘core standard’ is mandatory union monopoly bargaining.

“Localities in all 50 states would be denied the option to refuse to grant a single public-safety union the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who don’t want to join.

“Monopoly bargaining, euphemistically labeled as ‘exclusive representation,’ would be foisted on police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide. And in most states that already authorize public-safety union monopoly bargaining, H.R.413/S.3194 would widen its scope.”

Right to Work Supporters Must Not Let Their Guard Down — Even After Election Day

Mr. Mix pointed out that, up to now, the Right to Work Committee and its members have led a successful campaign to block the union brass from ramming police/fire monopoly-bargaining legislation through Congress.

However, he added, large majorities of both chambers of Congress, including a number of Republicans as well as practically every Democrat, are on the record in favor of H.R.413/S.3194. Now is certainly not the time to declare victory.

“Right to Work members and supporters nationwide must be prepared to keep turning up the heat on their senators and congressmen, even after Election Day, to ensure that neither a gussied-up version of ‘card check’ nor police/fire monopoly bargaining is enacted late this year,” said Mr. Mix.

“It might be hard for some people to believe that even Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and President Obama would be audacious enough to try to grant enormously consequential new special privileges to Big Labor during a ‘lame duck’ congressional session.

“But the grim determination of these politicians to help union bosses corral workers into unions, by hook or crook, cannot be overestimated.

“Forced-unionism opponents can’t afford to let their guard down for one moment. Not now, with crucial elections just a few weeks away. But not after Election Day, either.”

If freedom-loving citizens don’t keep turning up the heat on their senators and congressmen late this fall, a looming “lame duck” session of Congress could end up doing severe damage to the Right to Work.

Public-Safety Forced Unionism Still High on Capitol Hill Agenda

The American people do not support Big Labor’s legislative scheme to establish a new federal mandate imposing union “exclusive representation” (monopoly bargaining) over state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.

And powerful union-label politicians like U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) know this public-safety scheme (H.R.413/S.3194) is unpopular. That’s why they have repeatedly tried to sneak it through Congress.

Most recently, in June, Ms. Pelosi and her top lieutenants cut a deal with AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and other union bigwigs to attach H.R.413, the House version of the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, to a massive spending bill that provides funding for U.S. troops.

International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) union boss Harold Schaitberger openly admitted to helping concoct the scheme to tack H.R.413 on to H.R.4899, the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act, in a June 30 message to officers of his union subsidiaries. Early last month, the National Right to Work Committee obtained a copy of Mr. Schaitberger’s communication.

Firefighters Union Chief ‘Argued Strongly’ For War Supplemental Strategy

Mr. Schaitberger reported that he had “argued strongly” for attaching H.R.413 “to the War Supplemental funding proposal for our troops in Afghanistan.”

The backroom deal between House leaders and the union hierarchy allowed the public-safety forced-unionism measure to come to the floor so quickly that Right to Work members and their allies had virtually no time to mobilize for the vote.

On July 1, the House rubber-stamped H.R.413 as a provision of H.R.4899. With very few exceptions, the national media overlooked the fact that a pro-forced unionism federal takeover of state and local labor-management relations had been approved as part of an unrelated spending bill.

However, despite the media’s cluelessness, millions of Right to Work members and supporters around the country were well aware of what was going on because the Committee was informing and mobilizing them through e-mails, phone calls, and “snail” mail.

For several weeks in July, freedom-loving Americans mobilized by the Committee campaign contacted their senators again and again, urging them to oppose H.R.4899 on all votes unless and until the public-safety union monopoly-bargaining amendment was removed.

Several organizations representing the interests of local governments and public-safety departments, such as the National Sheriffs’ Association, joined with the Committee in lobbying against the forced-unionism sneak play.

The message clearly got through to a number of senators who normally vote with Big Labor, but are getting antsier and antsier about their next election, regardless of whether they have to face the voters this year, or not until 2012 or 2014.

On the evening of July 22, the Senate voted down the House-passed version of H.R.4899, and then approved a war spending bill without the monopoly-bargaining provision. Finally, on July 27, a chastened House acquiesced to the Senate’s action, and sent a stripped-down war supplemental to President Obama’s desk.

Vast Majority of Americans Reject Monopoly Bargaining

H.R.413 and its Senate companion, S.3194, would force countless police officers, firefighters and EMT’s to accept as their monopoly-bargaining agent a union they never voted for, and want nothing to do with.

Moreover, H.R.413 and S.3194 would, in practice, force tens of thousands of first responders to pay union dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs — despite Big Labor claims to the contrary.

“Americans overwhelmingly oppose monopoly bargaining and forced union dues, period,” noted Committee President Mark Mix.

“The public certainly has no interest in backing legislation designed to help Big Labor grab monopoly-bargaining privileges over hundreds of thousands of additional employees.”

Decades of polling confirm this point. Mr. Mix cited one recent scientific nationwide survey.

This poll found that 81% of Americans who regularly vote in statewide elections believe that employees in unionized businesses should retain the right to bargain for themselves. Just 17% of regular voters believe employees should not have that right, while 2% are unsure.

“Forcing union nonmembers to accept public-safety union officials as their monopoly-bargaining agent is what H.R.413 and S.3194 are all about,” explained Mr. Mix.

“Any state law or local ordinance authorizing public-safety union bosses to bargain on behalf of their members only would get tossed in the scrapheap if either measure became law.

“And, as Service Employees International Union second-in-command Anna Burger recently boasted, H.R.413/S.3194 would ‘create a national collective,’ i.e. monopoly, ‘bargaining standard for all public workers.’

“H.R.413/S.3194 simply can’t withstand public scrutiny. And Big Labor congressional leaders know it.”

Right to Work Committee And Its Members Will Keep Turning up the Heat

“Enactment of H.R.413 or S.3194 would be disastrous, not just for independent-minded public-safety officers and Right to Work advocates, but also for taxpayers and citizens who depend on their local police and fire departments,” Mr. Mix continued.

“That’s why the National Right to Work Committee and its members can’t afford to rest on our laurels for a minute. We will keep turning up the heat in preparation for the next Capitol Hill showdown over this legislation.

“Despite their recent setback, Harold Schaitberger, Richard Trumka, and the rest of the union hierarchy are far from ready to give up on their bid to federalize public-safety union monopoly bargaining.

“A number of the senators who helped defeat the public-safety scheme last month, when they were facing intense pressure from pro-Right to Work constituents, are current or previous cosponsors of this power grab.

“Right to Work supporters shouldn’t, and won’t, make the mistake of assuming such senators will be with us if, as is likely, Congress takes up H.R.413/S.3194 again this fall.

“Freedom-loving Americans must even be prepared for a possible showdown on this legislation during a ‘lame duck’ congressional session in November or December, after the elections, but before the new House and Senate are seated.

“Enactment of H.R.413/S.3194 would deal a harsh blow to the Right to Work cause.

“I know Committee members and supporters across the country understand that fact, and will do all they can to stop this legislation.”

(Source: July 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

Just before the U.S. Congress adjourned for a week-long Independence Day recess, Big Labor House members rubber-stamped legislation that would federally impose union monopoly bargaining over state and local public-safety employees.

The legislation (H.R.413), cynically mislabeled as the “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act,” would, at a time when government budget deficits are already sky high, hobble the ability of states and localities to keep their expenditures of taxpayer dollars under control.

Incredibly, the House voted July 1 to attach this scheme to a massive spending bill that provides funding for U.S. troops. The Senate is expected to take up this war supplemental bill, with H.R.413 attached, some time this month.

H.R.413 would empower Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) bureaucrats to survey all 50 states and identify which have failed to meet the legislation’s “core standards.”

And the key “core standard” is mandatory union monopoly bargaining. Localities in all 50 states would be denied the option to refuse to grant a single public-safety union the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who don’t want to join.

Bill ‘Further Empowers An Already Strong Lobby’

Monopoly bargaining, euphemistically labeled as “exclusive representation,” would be foisted on police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide. And in most states that already authorize public-safety union monopoly bargaining, H.R.413 would widen its scope.

As Wall Street Journal reporter Kris Maher recently noted, under this legislation, if any state refused to institute monopoly bargaining and comply with other mandates, FLRA bureaucrats “would step in and implement” them themselves.

A wide spectrum of political observers, inside the D.C. Beltway and around the country, have blasted H.R.413 and its Senate companion, S.3194, sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), as a budget-busting power grab.

For example, last month both the liberal Washington Post and the conservative National Review ran editorials urging Congress to block H.R.413/S.3194.

“What this bill would do,” charged the Post’s editors, “is impose a permanent, one-size-fits-all federal solution in an area — public-sector labor relations — that has traditionally been left to the states, and where state flexibility is probably more necessary than ever. . . . The bill further empowers an already strong lobby . . . .”

The editors of National Review (online edition) were even more forthright:

“Government employees’ unions already maintain a death grip on the finances of most state and local governments, and a remarkably bad piece of legislation — the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act — threatens to tighten that stranglehold . . . .”

Of course, the fact that liberal, conservative and moderate analysts recognize H.R.413/S.3194 as bad in principle and extraordinarily ill-timed doesn’t trouble Mr. Reid and union-label Democratic Congressman Dale Kildee (Mich.), the lead sponsor of the House legislation.

Harry Reid Cannot Prevail Without GOP Collaborators

The bottom line for them is that their legislation would empower and enrich union officials who are one of the Democratic Party’s “most important constituencies,” as National Review’s editors put it.

However, Democratic politicians, despite controlling the White House and substantial majorities in both chambers of Congress, cannot make Kildee-Reid the law of the land all on their own.

At this writing, due to the death late last month of Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), Mr. Reid’s majority caucus consists of 58 senators, 56 Democrats plus pro-forced unionism “Independents” Joe Lieberman (Conn.) and Bernie Sanders (Vt.).

But, regardless of the total number of senators at any time, it takes 60 to bring up a piece of legislation for a final vote if opponents seek to block it by launching an extended debate.

And the National Right to Work Committee, which is leading the opposition to Kildee-Reid on Capitol Hill, and its Senate allies already have a plan in place to sustain an extended debate against this legislation.

That’s why Harry Reid must pick up several GOP votes, while holding on to the votes of several Democrats from strong Right to Work states, in order to ram H.R.413 through the Senate.

“At this time, six GOP senators are sponsoring S.1611, monopoly-bargaining legislation that is virtually identical to the Reid bill,” noted Right to Work President Mark Mix.

“To thwart the federalization of union monopoly control over public-safety officers, Right to Work supporters must convince at least three of these senators to back away from their support for this scheme, and also convince at least two or three Democrats to oppose H.R.413.

“One Senate Democrat, North Carolina’s Kay Hagan, has already said publicly she will oppose the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, even though she usually votes with Big Labor. She reiterated her opposition just last month.”

History Shows Appeasement Won’t Insulate GOP Politicians

“Committee leaders are hopeful that, if pro-Right to Work constituents keep raising the pressure, they can ensure that Ms. Hagan keeps her word, and that a couple of other Democrats join her in opposing H.R.413,” Mr. Mix continued.

“But that won’t be enough to defeat the Kildee-Reid bill unless several would-be GOP appeasers of Big Labor reconsider their support for expanding government union bosses’ monopoly privileges.

“Right now, freedom-loving constituents are turning up the heat on all six GOP sponsors of S.1611, especially Sens. Scott Brown [Mass.], Mike Johanns [Neb.], and Lisa Murkowski [Alaska].

“Right to Work supporters are also reminding these senators that, in 2008 alone, four GOP senators who had tried to appease Big Labor by cosponsoring the 2007-2008 version of the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill were tossed out by their constituents.

“History shows forced-unionism appeasement won’t insulate politicians from Big Labor attacks — but will anger their constituents.”

Bill Would Pave Way For Union Monopoly Control Over All Public Employees

Mr. Mix acknowledged that Right to Work supporters face an uphill battle to block H.R.413 in the Senate. But this power grab is so dangerous, he added, that Committee members must do everything possible to stop it.

“Kildee/Reid would 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.

“As union bigwig Anna Burger, head of the ‘Change to Win’ union conglomerate, recently boasted, H.R.413/S.3194 would ‘create a national collective,’ i.e., monopoly, ‘bargaining standard for all public workers.’

“In other words, if Congress federalizes union monopoly control over public-safety employees, the federalization of union monopoly bargaining over teachers, and state and local public servants of every other kind, will be next.

“Enactment of H.R.413/S.3194 would deal a harsh blow to the Right to Work cause. I know Committee members and supporters across the country understand that fact, and will do all they can to stop this legislation.”

May’s issue contains the following headlines:

Police/Fire Union Scheme Prepped For Floor Vote – Bill Would Herd Now-Independent ‘First Responders’ Into Unions

Iowans Again Defeat Forced-Union-Fee Scheme – But Hawkeye State’s Popular Right to Work Law Still Under Fire

New Jersey’s ‘Day of Reckoning Has Arrived’ — Government Union Monopolists Have Brought State to Brink of Ruin

Why Is Big Labor ‘Out of Touch’ With Workers? — Forced-Unionism Privileges, Not Fat Paychecks, Are the Root Cause

Forced-Unionism Expansion, by Hook or Crook — Big Labor ‘Organizing’ Strategy Reliant on Washington, D.C.

Fewer Bidders = Higher Costs For Taxpayers — White House Federal-Contract Policy Rewards Big Labor Patrons

To view these and other recent Committee Newsletter articles online, click here to go to the Committee’s “Newsroom” section where the 20 most recent newsletter articles can be easily viewed.

(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.”

(Source: April 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

Over the course of the past few decades, public servants, especially state and local government employees, have become Big Labor’s bread and butter.

By 2009, union officials wielded monopoly-bargaining power over 7.5 million state and local employees, nearly 43% of all such employees nationwide, compared to just 8% of private-sector workers.

Moreover, for many years now, Big Labor featherbedding and counterproductive work rules have sharply increased real taxpayer costs for compensation of state and local government employees.

In fact, from 1998 to 2008 alone, taxpayers’ aggregate real costs for compensation of state and local government employees soared at a rate nearly 50% faster than the total real growth of private-sector employee compensation!

And now, incredibly, the Big Labor Congress is poised to sock it to taxpayers again.

This spring, the U.S. House and Senate are on the verge of rubber-stamping a new federal mandate ensuring that public-sector union bosses get monopoly-bargaining privileges over additional hundreds of thousands of state and local public-safety employees.

Kildee-Gregg Would Pave Way For Dragooning All State, Local Employees Into Unions

This federal mandate (H.R.413 and S.1611), respectively introduced in the House and Senate by Big Labor Congressman Dale Kildee (D-Mich.) and Big Labor-appeasing Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), goes by an innocent-sounding moniker, the “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act.”

But this label mocks the reality that the legislation would incite conflict between government agencies and employees and hurt taxpayers.

H.R.413/S.1611 would institute a federal mandate foisting union “exclusive representation” (monopoly bargaining) on state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.

This legislation 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, Kildee-Gregg 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, H.R.413/S.1611 would widen its scope.

Kildee-Gregg would force countless policemen, firefighters and EMT’s to accept as their monopoly-bargaining agent a union they never 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.

States With Heaviest Public-Sector Unionization Have Higher Taxes, More Debt

“The record shows that pervasive unionization of government employees is closely associated with higher taxes and more public debt,” said National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.

“Therefore, enactment of federal police/fire monopoly-bargaining legislation would almost certainly lead to tax hikes in state after state.

“In 2008, while 40.7% of all government employees, federal, state and local, nationwide were unionized, public-sector unionization was 60% or more in seven states.

“That year, residents of those Big Labor-controlled states had to fork over, on average, a 22% higher share of their income in state and local taxes than did the residents of states with below-average public-sector unionization.

“Moreover, in Fiscal 2008, eight of the 10 states with the most long-term debt as a share of their personal income had public-sector unionization higher than 50%.

“Meanwhile, every one of the 10 states with the least long-term debt as a share of personal income had public-sector unionization below the national average.

“In five of these least indebted states, public-sector unionization was less than half the national average!

“Federal personal and business taxes are already poised to skyrocket over the next few years. Cities, towns and counties across America are facing their worst fiscal crisis in decades.

“And yet, our out-of-touch Congress seems eager to pass legislation that would greatly compound the damage. Even in Washington, D.C., this degree of recklessness is unusual.”

Big Labor Scheme Expected to Sail Through House Within The Next Few Weeks

Recently, top bosses of the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) and other public-safety unions that are leading the charge for H.R.413/S.1611 have boasted of their intent to ram H.R.413 through the House during the next few weeks.

And Big Labor’s control over the lower chamber is so tight that Right to Work members can only slow down this legislation there.

However, freedom-loving Americans still have a chance of blocking Kildee-Gregg in the Senate.

“This will, without a doubt, be an uphill fight,” commented Mr. Mix. “Part of the reason why is that Judd Gregg and a few other Republican senators are colluding with the Democratic congressional leadership and the Obama Administration to make sure Kildee-Gregg gets rubber-stamped.

“Right to Work advocates’ only chance of victory is to prevent this bill from coming up for a final Senate vote by mobilizing at least 41 senators to sustain an extended debate for as long as necessary.”

To Prevail, Right to Work Will Need to Switch Over a Handful of Senators’ Votes

“To prevail in this fight,” Mr. Mix continued, “the Committee will almost certainly need to switch over the votes of a handful of senators who habitually vote according to the union bosses’ dictates.”

Among the top lobbying targets he cited are Virginia Sens. Jim Webb (D) and Mark Warner (D) and North Carolina Sen. Kay Hagan (D).

“While Sens. Webb, Warner and Hagan all tend to vote how Big Labor tells them to, they also represent two states that have longstanding laws, with bipartisan support, that explicitly ban all union monopoly bargaining over state and local government employees,” Mr. Mix explained.

“If we can convince these three senators and just a few others to support the Right to Work in this one instance, Kildee-Gregg can still be thwarted this year.”

As you know, the Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill is designed to FORCE every firefighter and police officer in the country under union boss control — and is just the first step toward forcing ALL state and local public employees under Big Labor’s thumb. (Push Triangle to Play Video) 

The player will show in this paragraph

(The Strategy Room is FoxNews.com’s live web based video programming from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET  that provides: “always entertaining discussion of the day’s top stories, plus a variety of hour-long shows on topics like business, health, technology, and entertainment.”)

(Source: March 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

Poll after poll indicates that union-label Democratic U.S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln faces a tough battle to get reelected in Right to Work Arkansas this November.

And Ms. Lincoln clearly knows she has a problem.

That’s why she’s now suggesting to independent employees and employers in her home state that, although she has routinely voted according to Big Labor’s dictates on key forced-unionism issues during her nearly two decades on Capitol Hill, she is now an “independent” voice on such issues.

Freedom-loving Arkansans shouldn’t believe it for a minute.

First of all, even if Ms. Lincoln were consistently opposing compulsory unionism in the current Congress, Arkansas Right to Work supporters would have good reason to doubt she would continue to stand up to the union bosses once she was safely installed for another six-year term.

And the fact is, even in the current Congress, while she is trailing several potential pro-Right to Work general election opponents, Ms. Lincoln continues to support major forced-unionism power grabs whenever she thinks she can get away with it.

Gregg-Kildee Would Pave Way For Dragging All State, Local Employees Into Unions

One major example is Ms. Lincoln’s stealth move just before the Senate’s Christmas recess last year to sign on as a cosponsor of Big Labor-appeasing New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg’s (R) S.1611, the so-called “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act.”

The innocent-sounding name of this legislation (also introduced in the U.S. House as H.R.413 by Big Labor Michigan Democrat Congressman Dale Kildee) mocks the reality that it would incite conflict between government agencies and employees and hurt taxpayers.

S.1611/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.

This legislation would rewrite the public-sector labor laws of the vast majority of the 50 states to make them more pro-forced unionism.

In Arkansas and other states that haven’t caved in to Big Labor demands for monopoly bargaining, Gregg-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.1611/H.R.413 would widen its scope.

Gregg-Kildee would force countless policemen, firefighters and EMT’s to accept as their monopoly-bargaining agent a union they never 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.

Mark Mix Presses Sen. Lincoln to Withdraw Cosponsorship of S.1611

“Poll after poll shows the public overwhelmingly agrees that a worker who chooses not to join a union should be free as an individual to bargain for himself or herself,” pointed out National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.

“Gregg-Kildee completely rejects that principle. For that reason alone, it lacks popular support.

“Moreover, there is a large and growing body of evidence that public-sector union monopoly bargaining helps drive up wasteful government spending, pouring fuel on the fire for future tax hikes.

“In the current political environment, with federal personal and business taxes already poised to skyrocket over the next few years and cities, towns and counties across America already facing their worst fiscal crisis in decades, popular opposition to schemes like Gregg-Kildee is mounting.

“By mandating public-safety union monopoly bargaining over a range of issues even wider than is currently the case in Big Labor-controlled states like Illinois and Michigan, this power grab could push localities across the country into bankruptcy.

“Does Congress as a whole, and do so-called ‘moderate’ politicians like Blanche Lincoln, really want to bear the responsibility for such a disastrous outcome?

“If Sen. Lincoln wants at last to make her vaunted ‘independence’ a reality, rather than just a hollow campaign slogan, the first thing she should do is withdraw her cosponsorship of S.1611.”

Mr. Mix urged freedom-loving Arkansans to call Ms. Lincoln’s office at 202-224-4843 and personally ask her to repudiate her support for the Gregg-Kildee scheme.

The bills, which union bosses themselves call the greatest (potential) change in labor law in decades, would mean literally tens of millions in new dues revenue from public safety workers who would be fired if they didn’t pay union dues and fees. Forced unionism apologists in Congress have been working on this since the late 1970’s.

(Click-on Green Triangle to play)

(Source: January 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

It is growing very clear that Big Labor politicians know the American people do not support their scheme to establish a new federal mandate imposing union “exclusive representation” (monopoly bargaining) over state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide. Jus t be fore the U.S. House adjourned last month, forced-unionism cheerleader Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her cohorts plotted to sneak this legislation through their chamber while attracting as little public attention as possible.

Behind the scenes, Ms. Pelosi, Big Labor Congressman Dale Kildee (D-Mich.), and others worked on a plan to tack Mr. Kildee’s House version of the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill (H.R.413) onto H.R.3326, the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Bill.

And Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Kildee et al probably would have succeeded in securing a House rubber-stamp for a huge expansion of union bosses’ monopoly privileges without facing major resistance – but for the efforts of the National Right to Work Committee and its allies on Capitol Hill.

Committee Staff Alerted Leaders of Allied Groups

On December 14, within just hours of learning from a key Capitol Hill source that Big Labor House leaders were preparing to bring up H.R.413 as an amendment to H.R.3326, Committee legislative officers began sending faxes and e-mails and making personal visits to key Capitol Hill offices.

Right to Work staff also alerted leaders of several organizations representing the interests of local governments and public-safety departments, such as the National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA), that is also opposed to H.R.413 and its U.S. Senate counterpart, S.1611.

House members from key swing districts who were already edgy as a result of the intense public controversy over ObamaCare thus began receiving calls and e-mails from an array of groups urging them to resist all efforts to attach the monopoly-bargaining bill to the defense spending measure.

Moreover, congressmen and their staff members certainly knew from previous showdowns over forced unionism legislation that, if H.R.3326 emerged with a monopoly-bargaining amendment, their offices would quickly be flooded with calls from Right to Work members mobilized by the Committee’s phone operation.

And on Wednesday, December 16, it became clear that Speaker Pelosi and co. had decided to heed, for the moment, concerned congressmen when H.R.3326 was formally introduced without the public-safety monopoly bargaining provision.

Vast Majority of Americans Reject Monopoly Bargaining

Of course, Big Labor House leaders are virtually certain to try again early this year to smuggle H.R.413 through their chamber. And there are still several pending FY 2010 appropriations bills to which this destructive measure could be attached. H.R.413 and the nearly identical S.1611 would force countless policemen, firefighters and EMT’s to accept as their monopoly-bargaining agent a union they personally never voted for, and want nothing to do with.

Moreover, H.R.413 and S.1611 do NOT protect the Right To Work without being forced to pay union dues or fees either of the public-safety employees upon whom Congress is imposing a union monopoly, or of the public-safety employees who are already subject to one.

“Americans overwhelmingly oppose monopoly bargaining, period,” noted Committee President Mark Mix. “The public certainly has no interest in backing legislation designed to help Big Labor grab monopoly-bargaining privileges over hundreds of thousands of additional employees.”

Mr. Mix cited a recent scientific nationwide survey conducted by veteran pollster Del Ali and his firm Research 2000. The poll found that 81% of Americans who regularly vote in statewide elections believe that employees in unionized businesses should retain the right to bargain for themselves. Just 17% of regular voters believe employees should not have that right, while 2% are unsure.

“Forcing union nonmembers to accept public-safety union officials as their monopoly-bargaining agent is what H.R.413 and S.1611 are all about,” explained Mr. Mix. “Any state law or local ordinance authorizing public-safety union bosses to bargain on behalf of their members only would get tossed in the scrapheap if either measure became law.”

And government union bosses actually see this legislation as just a first step toward enactment of a federal mandate corralling state and local employees of all kinds into unions. “H.R.413 simply can’t withstand public scrutiny. And Nancy Pelosi knows it.”

Big Labor-Appeasing West Virginia GOP Congresswoman ‘Should Heed Her Own Mayor’

Mr. Mix continued: “Federalizing union monopoly control over public safety employees would be ill-advised at any time, but at a time when taxes are already poised to skyrocket and cities and towns across America are already facing their worst fiscal crisis in decades, enactment of H.R.413 would be incredibly reckless.”

Pervasive public-sector union monopoly bargaining helps government union bosses build up giant political machines, which in most cases are fueled by workers’ compulsory union dues and fees. “

Government union officials use their electoral machines to bankroll Tax-and-Spend state legislative and executive politicians. And the onerous taxes such politicians foist on families and businesses sharply suppress job and income growth.

“Responsible local elected officials across the country have recognized the danger and are urging Congress to defeat H.R.413 and S.1611.”

For example, just this past November, Danny Jones, the mayor of Charleston, W.Va., publicly expressed his concern that this legislation could “bankrupt” his city. In an interview with Charleston’s Daily Mail, Mr. Jones starkly predicted of H.R.413/S.1611: “It’s going to change things. The relationship [between the city and the police union] will become adversarial. “. . . If you look around the states, the most unionized states are the ones that are most broke.”

“Unfortunately,” noted Mr. Mix, virtually every Democrat in Congress and dozens of Republicans are choosing to back the Police/Fire Monopoly- Bargaining Bill in spite of what concerned mayors, city council members, and public-safety officials have to say. “For example, West Virginia GOP Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito, who resides in Charleston when she isn’t in Washington, is a cosponsor of the very bill her hometown mayor charges could bankrupt their city.”

Ms. Capito should heed her own mayor and withdraw her support for H.R.413 immediately.”

Right to Work Committee And Its Members Will Keep Turning up the Heat

“Enactment of H.R.413 or S.1611 would be disastrous, not just for independent-minded public-safety officers and Right to Work advocates, but also for taxpayers and citizens who depend on their local police and fire departments,” Mr. Mix continued. “That’s why the National Right to Work Committee and its members can’t afford to rest on our laurels for a minute. We will keep turning up the heat in preparation for the next Capitol Hill showdown over H.R.413/S.1611.

“I urge all Right to Work members to maintain and expand their support, both lobbying and financial, for our campaign. Working together, we can stop the federalization of public-safety monopoly bargaining in 2010.”

March 10, 2010

National Right to Work Vice President Blasts the Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill in Testimony to Congress

Big Labor power grab would be a disaster for workers, taxpayers and struggling state economies

Washington, D.C (March 10, 2010) – National Right to Work Committee Vice President Doug Stafford, urged members of Congress to oppose H.R. 413/ S.1611, the Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill in a hearing before the House Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions this morning.

As detailed in Mr. Stafford’s testimony, if it becomes law H.R. 413 and S. 1611 would force monopoly bargaining on every police officer, firefighter, and emergency medical technician (EMT) in the country, putting them under the monopoly control of union bosses. Mr. Stafford blasted the bill as “yet another bill in a long line of paybacks to union bosses,” in his testimony before the House HELP Subcommittee:

“First, let’s be clear. The ultimate goal of this legislation is to force every firefighter and police officer in the country under union boss control, whether the individual public safety officers want it or not. And whether state and local governments want it or not.

“Under monopoly bargaining, individual workers lose the power to speak for themselves in dealing with their employers, to the detriment of workers and taxpayers. In addition to imposing monopoly bargaining on countless workers, H.R. 413 and its companion bill in the Senate, S. 1611, would override state labor laws across the country.”

Currently, state and local governments have the authority to enter into monopoly bargaining agreements. Many have chosen to do so and many have not. But H.R. 413 and S. 1611 would grant the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) oversight of the labor-management laws of public safety workers in political subdivisions across the country, stripping localities of the right to govern themselves.

Mr. Stafford’s testimony also demonstrated how monopoly bargaining strains the already-vulnerable budgets of state and local government:

“This power comes with a price — H.R. 413 and S. 1611 would also have a detrimental impact on the budgets of state and local governments. Last year, Vallejo, California — where union bosses have already been granted control over public safety workers — went bankrupt after nearly 75 percent of its budget was spent on unionized police and firefighters. And today, despite a $26 billion state budget deficit, out-of-control public sector union bosses aren’t shouldering cuts or taking blame for the problems they’ve caused — they’re threatening strikes!

“In other states where union bosses have been granted monopoly bargaining privileges over public sector workers, we’re seeing the exact same thing. In fact, the Mayor of Lancaster, Pennsylvania recently stated that these struggling cities are ‘handcuffed’ by public sector monopoly bargaining.

“Put simply, passage of the Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill could be the last economic straw for already struggling communities. During these troubled economic times, the last thing Congress should be considering is a Big Labor power grab that would hurt workers and bust state budgets.”

###

The National Right to Work Committee, established in 1955, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, single-purpose citizens’ organization dedicated to the principle that all Americans must have the right to join a union if they choose to, but none should ever be forced to affiliate with a union in order to get or keep a job. 

www.NRTWC.org