Look Around HR

Iowa Governor Chet Culver, a Democrat, is said to be contemplating vetoing a controversial labor backed bill that would force unionism on public employees. Iowa, as shown in this graph, is a Right-to-Work state. However, a simple repeal by the Democratic majority could do away with that status, as it is not a constitutionally protected right. This is what the majority hopes to do; just under a different name.

Here is a good rundown of the legislation and the controversy surrounding it from Linda Miller of the Quad City Times:

The bill, with the amendment, adds several mandatory bargaining items to the teacher quality law and eliminates some provisions that provided a balance between management and labor. The changes significantly tilt the playing field in favor of labor. The Des Moines Register reported on 3-20-08 that “school boards would lose much of their authority to determine a number of issues, including scheduling, class size and early retirement benefits for staff…”

None however were as controversial as the House Democrats attempt to sneak through the wildly controversial “Fair Share” provision. “Fair Share” is not fair. It is forced unionism. The House Democrats plan allowed forced unionism, which is currently illegal, to be placed onto the bargaining table by public employee unions. Forced unionism legislation like “Fair Share” forces non-union public employees - like teachers- to pay union dues. The only way for public employees to avoid paying union dues is to quit their jobs. The effect of any forced unionism legislation is the same as a direct repeal of the Right to Work law.

More…

The rest of the House Democrat’s plan stripped school board members, city council members and county supervisors of their ability to control the level of property tax increases. That ability is forfeited to an unnamed and unelected adjudicator. The reason is because property taxes makeup the vast majority of local government revenue and pay for nearly all of any employee contract. If the costs for that contract increase, so do property taxes.

And she finishes with this point…

With public employee unions able to bargain for that list of items, what use is there for managers, principals or superintendents anymore?

The specific language of the bill forces school districts and local governments to pay for whatever the eventual employment agreement is between labor and management. The language also states that if there is an impasse, an adjudicator decides between the two positions. Which means that if the adjudicator makes a decision on class size that forces a school district to hire more teachers or build new classrooms to meet the bargained class size number, the school district must levy property taxes to cover those increased costs.

Please read her entire post as it provides the best explanation of this scary legislation that I can find anywhere. I am not going to get into the games that Democrats and Republicans have been playing with this (I’ll leave that for the politicos). I will just say this is an attempt to undermine the right-to-work status of Iowa, and that is a dangerous thing. This will be bad for employers, it will be bad for employees that will be forced into unionism, and bad for every taxpayer that will see tax increases.

Last week, the bill was officially sent to Culver’s desk, and here is what he had to say on this subject:

Culver on Thursday sent a message to reporters saying that after more than 30 meetings with managers, union members, lawmakers and the public, he realized there’s no way to rewrite the bill in a way that would satisfy all parties.

“Through these meetings and communications, we have attempted to reach consensus among the many stakeholders who would be affected by this legislation,” Culver said in the statement. “Unfortunately, it has become clear that it is not possible to amend or revise this bill in a way that reflects a genuine consensus.”

Let’s hope the governor vetoes it, and we will keep you updated.

For years, members of the Colorado state legislature have unsuccessfully tried to push legislation to make Colorado a right-to-work state. However, petitioners recently gathered more than 130,000 signatures (nearly twice as many as the required amount) and the issue is likely headed to the voters in November.

The Secretary of State’s office will have to verify the signatures and make sure they are legit. If the voters approved the measure, workers would not be forced to join a union and pay dues- if they choose not to.

Like so many times, this issue pits business vs. labor. As a result of this petition, labor has tried to make up their own initiatives on issues such as mandatory cost of living increases, requiring employers to offer health insurance, and laws to make it harder to fire employees.

Gov. Bill Ritter, a Democrat, opposes the right-to-work measure, and called for all sides to back down.

“There are still opportunities to de-escalate this and get to a place where none of these measures appear on the ballot,” said Ritter spokesman Evan Dreyer. “The governor will continue the conversations he’s been having and will talk with the business community and labor organizations and try to get there.”

A Better Colorado is the organization that is leading this effort. You can follow them here.

There are currently 22 states that are considered Right-to-Work states. About half of those have Constitutional amendments guarantying the right. There are currently two national organizations that spearhead this movement. The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is the legal arm of the movement, while the National Right to Work Committee focuses on the legislative side. They are separate organizations.