Right to Work? No, RTW = Rob the Workers: John Marty

Right to Work? No, RTW = Rob the Workers

by Senator John Marty March 22, 2012
The so-called "Right to Work" (RTW) constitutional amendment pushed by Republicans is anything but a right to work. In 1961, Dr. Martin Luther King described the purpose of "Right to Work" laws as efforts "to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining by which unions have improved wages and working conditions of everyone.Wherever these laws have been passed, wages are lower, job opportunities are fewer and there are no civil rights." Dr. King called "Right to Work," a "false slogan" and a "fraud." King recognized that unions play a critical role; they have provided better public health and safety standards and have worked to make the economy work for everyone. In fact, on the day when Dr. King was assassinated in 1968, he was in Memphis supporting a sanitation workers' strike. To him, unions were essential to the rights and dignity of working people. Fifty years later, we are still fighting the same battle, this time with a Republican proposal to amend the Minnesota Constitution with the so-called "Right to Work." Some things haven't changed, and RTW is as fundamentally dishonest today as it was then. Anyone who is struggling to find a job would love to have a right to work. But this constitutional amendment has nothing to do with that. As in the past, this legislation is simply a proposal to allow workers who benefit from collective bargaining, arbitration, and other benefits to refuse to pay for the services they receive from the union. If this were accurately portrayed, the public would overwhelmingly reject such a scheme. That's why they use deceptive language. Their ballot question would ask voters whether to amend the constitution to guarantee people the "freedom to decide to join or not join a labor union, and to pay or not pay dues to a labor union." Workers already have that choice. Under federal and state law, if employees vote to organize a union, individual workers cannot be required to join or pay dues; they can only be required to pay for the representation provided by the union. RTW, by removing the requirement that workers pay for those services, means few unions could survive. This RTW amendment is being pushed for the very reasons that Dr. King identified: to weaken unions and bring down wages and benefits. And the impact is dramatic; the average family income in RTW states is almost $10,000/year lower than in Minnesota. Our economy is already stacked against workers. Many cannot find work, and many of those who are working do not earn enough. More than three in ten Minnesotans are struggling to meet basic needs. Some workers cannot afford housing and go from their jobs to a homeless shelter at night. Passing the RTW proposal would make the situation much worse. Just as importantly, lives of workers are at greater risk under RTW. Unions have long led the fight for worker safety laws and enforcement. During the 2011 legislative session, I remember a hearing where several firefighters sat in full protective gear -- one even in a hazmat suit -- in an already overheated capitol hearing room, to persuade lawmakers to provide sufficient training for firefighters. Unions have also been instrumental in negotiating with employers to provide safety equipment at construction sites; they fight for adequate staffing levels for nurses in hospitals and for protective gear for police and firefighters. This push for worker safety makes a huge difference. Workers in states with RTW laws are over 50% more likely to die in workplace incidents than workers in non-RTW states like Minnesota. Fortunately, the RTW proposal is struggling in the legislature. The Senate Republicans pulled the bill out of the committee it was assigned to, apparently because they didn't have enough votes to pass it there. In the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, one Republican spoke in favor of the proposal but voted against it, and another spoke against the proposal, then voted for it. They are struggling; we can defeat this. Hundreds of workers packed the hallways of the capitol outside of the hearing room to express strong opposition to a bill that would take away their rights. They understand that the proposal has nothing to do with any right to work. To them, RTW means "rob the workers". It's time to move beyond this fraudulent legislation. Let's talk about a trueright to work: Everyone who wants to work should have a right to a job - a job that pays a living wage. There are so many people eager to work, and so many tasks that need doing in our society. Yet our society has failed to connect the workers with the work that needs to be done. We could start by taking unemployed construction workers and hiring them to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure - making schools and all public buildings energy efficient, addressing the enormous backlog of deferred maintenance of public housing and buildings at our colleges and universities. We could hire teachers to expand early childhood programs, which provide great savings over the long run, and employ young adults to intervene with at-risk teens. It is time to stop attacking workers and start attacking unemployment. Defeating RTW would be a great start.

ALEC's Lackeys: King and Keith: the Cucking Stool

ALEC's Lackeys: King and Keith

In an attempt to pivot away from the consequences of the budget cuts they insisted upon, Minnesota Republicans want to change the conversation. Last week, Republican legislative leaders held a press conference to announce "Reform 2.0." Currently lacking details, Reform 2.0 is supposed to gather ideas through citizen input, but it's more likely to be warmed over leftovers from the last session. It's a virtual certainty that the Reform 2.0 agenda will look almost exactly like the American Legislative Exchange Council's (ALEC) agenda for "state government reform." The 2010 Republican "reform agenda" was cribbed from ALEC, and 2011 will feature more of the same. And in today's episode of ALEC's Lackeys, we'll look at two of the most "reform-minded" Republican members of the House - Reps. Keith Downey and King Banaian.

The Minnesota GOP's "reform (1.0 and 2.0) agenda" seems to be drawn directly from ALEC's 2011 "State Budget Reform Toolkit" in both word and spirit. If you go line by line through the list of ALEC's "Index of Recommendations," the parallels are striking. The deep, original reform ideas of Rep. Keith Downey are nothing more than rewarmed ALEC boilerplate. The dazzling budgetary wizardry of Rep. King Banaian is cut and pasted from the ALEC playbook.

ALEC Recommendation: The legislature should require each agency to have a mission statement with goals and objectives linked to the state’s core functions of government.
ALEC Recommendation: States should adopt a Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) approach to bring sanity and fiscal sustainability to the state budget process.

At the top of all Minnesota Republican talk about the budget is a buzzword - "priority-based budgeting." That was the basis for Rep. Banaian's HF2, one of the core priorities of the House GOP.

ALEC Recommendation: States should create a permanent sunset review commission to recommend ways the state can cut costs, reduce waste, and improve efficiency and service levels.

HF2 also included a "sunset commission" that would force all state agencies to appear in front of a panel to justify their existence or be eliminated. This was rolled into SF1047 (the omnibus state government bill) which was eventually vetoed by Governor Dayton.
When you get to "Section IV: Tools to Control Cost and Improve Government Efficiency" in ALEC's toolkit, the similarities with the legislative agenda of Keith Downey are downright eerie.

ALEC Recommendation: Adopt a state hiring freeze encompassing all departments.
ALEC Recommendation: Policymakers should delay automatic pay increases for state employees until the rising costs of government are brought under control.
ALEC Recommendation: Increase the use of privatization and competitive contracting to execute tasks to lower costs and improve the quality of service provided.
ALEC Recommendation: Develop a program (or programs) for state employees to allow them to be rewarded for savings generated by new innovations or re-engineering of existing business practices.

HF4: Mandates a 15% reduction in state workforce by 2015 by using a combination of hiring freezes, furloughs, and early retirement incentives.
HF192: The "Reinventing Government Employment Act" would freeze salaries, benchmark future salaries based on a review process, implement an employee "gainsharing program" where employees who save money get a share of the savings, force state employee units to bid for contracted services against private contractors, and propose a constitutional amendment to make Minnesota a "right to work (for less)" state.

ALEC Recommendation: States should adopt a constitutional revenue or spending limit. Such a limit would impose much needed discipline on profligate spending patterns.
ALEC Recommendation: Pass a balanced budget requirement, mandating that the expenditures included in the budget for the next fiscal year shall not exceed estimated revenues, and create a protected emergency reserve account.

HF1612: Proposes a constitutional amendment limiting spending to the revenue taken in the previous biennium.
HF67: Limits spending in the 2012-13 biennium to forecasted revenues.
Please do go and read the ALEC playbook, erm, "toolkit," if you haven't already. Reform 2.0 will be more of the same. Book it.
Follow me on Twitter @aaronklemz
 

ALEC model legislation for "union workers protection"

http://www.scribd.com/doc/59414184/ALEC-Model-Legislation-for-Union-Workers-Protection

 

2

Contents

MODEL LEGISLATIONFOR UNION WORKERS’ PROTECTION

I. Payroll Deduction Reforms

Public Employer Payroll Deduction Policy 5Employee Rights Reform Act 6Prohibiting Payroll Deductions for Administrative Reasons 9Prohibition of Negative Check-off Act 10

II. Campaign Finance

Voluntary Contributions Act 13Paycheck Protection – Contribution Disclosure Act 15Paycheck Protection – Limitations on Employers and Labor Organizations 17Preventing Political Use of Workplace Representation Dues and Fees 18Prohibition on Compensation Deductions Act 19Enforce Beck Rights – Executive Order 20Resolution in Support of Reporting Requirements for Public Sector Unions 24

III. Financial Transparency

Union Financial Responsibility Act 27Political Funding Reform Act 38Workers Bill Of Rights 40Entitling Public Employees Paying Dues or Fees Under A Contract With “Union Security” Certain Disclosure Rights 42Disclosure of Union Salaries 43

IV. Religious Objectors

Religious Objection 46

 V. Right to Work

Right to Work Act 49

The rest is at the link ..