The State of State Unions: A Year in Review

This post was contributed by Tony D. Dick Esq., an Associate in McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC's Labor and Employment Practice Group in Columbus, Ohio.

Many watched intently in early February as the political theater unfolded in Madison, Wisconsin when Republican Governor Scott Walker proposed legislation to limit the collective bargaining rights of most state government employees. In a matter of days, the Capitol would be swarming with protesters and demonstrators on both sides of the issue. What followed was weeks of sit-ins in the Capitol, a mass walkout by all 14 Democratic State Senators to block a vote on the proposed law, the unprecedented recall elections of 6 Republican and 3 Democratic state lawmakers and a bitterly fought campaign to unseat an incumbent State Supreme Court Justice widely viewed as a pro-Walker.

Those in favor of public sector reform argue that collective bargaining limits are necessary to deal with steep budget shortfalls. Projections from Governor Walker’s office estimate that the state will save approximately $30 million this year as a direct result of the new law. On the other side, pro-union allies contend that moves like the one in Wisconsin are nothing more than a political power grab designed to bust up unions and cripple their longstanding support of Democratic candidates. Observers on both sides generally agree though that the movement to reform public sector collective bargaining rights has invigorated the debate on the role of unions in today’s uncertain economic climate.
 

Wisconsin’s law essentially limits collective bargaining for all state employees, except police officers, firefighters and state troopers, to negotiating wages. Essentially, state employees are limited to negotiating an increase in wages commensurate to the rise in inflation, unless voters approve additional wage increases through a referendum. In addition, state employees are required to contribute more toward their healthcare costs and pensions. And, under the law, unions can no longer require members to pay dues and must hold annual votes to maintain their status.

By March, even with the burgeoning protests in Wisconsin, 18 other states would follow its lead and propose various forms of legislation to curtail the collective bargaining powers of public unions. Of these 18 states, Ohio’s efforts have garnered the most media attention. Under Ohio’s Senate Bill 5, passed at the end of March, state employees would be required to contribute more of their salaries toward guaranteed pensions and healthcare costs. The bill also outlaws public sector strikes, bans binding arbitration, replaces a seniority system with merit-based pay for workers and gives counties and other legislative bodies, such as school boards, the final say on what offers to accept. If the legislative body refrains from selecting either side’s last best offer, the public employer’s final offer would win out.

In states like Indiana, Idaho and New Hampshire, less ambitious legislation has been introduced to curb state unions. The laws passed in Indiana and Idaho deal exclusively with narrowing the scope of collective bargaining rights for teachers. While in New Hampshire, the legislature is currently reconciling separate right-to-work bills passed in its House and Senate. The final bill would allow workers who opt out of a union to stop paying union fees.

Unions have not sat by idly following the wave of new legislation. The International Association of Fire Fighters announced in April that it will not support any federal candidates this election cycle as a protest against the collective bargaining laws. During the 2010 election cycle, it spent almost $15 million on behalf of federal candidates. In Ohio, in the months since the passage of Senate Bill 5, unions and their members have regrouped and worked to collect enough signatures to place a referendum on the ballot challenging the law. By mid-July, over 1.3 million Ohioans signed a petition to trigger a referendum. Issue 2 is officially on the ballot and will determine the fate of the law in Ohio going forward. Two weeks before the election, the latest polling data from Quinnipiac forecasts the likely repeal of Senate Bill 5 – 57 percent to 32 percent.

Meanwhile, in Wisconsin, the first rounds of collective bargaining under the new legislation have begun. The school board in Neenah, Wisconsin negotiated with teachers on the only matter that they are legally allowed to bargain for – a salary increase based on increased inflation. The pay increase for the teachers will not exceed 1.7 percent and they will see their benefits decrease by 4.3 percent. Teachers in Neenah will also pay more toward their health insurance premiums and pensions. The teachers reported that the school board negotiated fairly given the constraints of the new law.
 

Employment Discrimination Litigation will Increase in 2009 and Beyond

Business downsizing, a poor job market, and increased government enforcement will dramatically increase employment discrimination lawsuits for the foreseeable future. We got a glimpse of this trend with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) release of 2009 charge statistics noting a record number of discrimination claims filed last year. The EEOC report shows that 95,000 charges were filed, up 15%. The agency also reports financial recoveries of $376 million for victims of discrimination.

Charge activity for 2009 should rise exponentially. The economy shed 2.4 million jobs in the last 4 months mostly due to permanent layoffs. Job prospects are bleak with current unemployment at 8.1 %, the highest level in 25 years. The Obama Administration's budget increases spending on Department of Labor enforcement activities.

Employees have up to 300 days to bring a discrimination charge with the EEOC so many of the potential claims from recent layoffs haven't yet been filed. An employee's proclivity to sue an employer for discrimination is related in part to economics. In a good economy, employees find new jobs quickly and don't look back. While unemployed, economic and emotional factors may motivate employees to pursue litigation. Recent news reports describe the plight of many workers facing job loss and financial ruin.

Union Leader Predicts EFCA passage by August 2009

Andy Stern, President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), was recently interviewed by USA Today where he predicted the passage of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) by August. 

Unions have substantial political clout and this prediction should be respected. According to Department of Labor filings, the SEIU has almost 1.7 million members and spent $32.9 million on political activities and lobbying in 2007. The SEIU's 2008 report will likely show an increase in its political spending on the Presidential Election. Mr. Stern has also expressed his sentiments on organized labor's role in the election and its expectations in a Wall Street Journal Interview as follows:

"We just won an election. It's no secret." By "we," Andy Stern means "American workers." He also means Big Labor. Speaking on behalf of the fastest growing trade group in America, the Service Employees International Union -- and as one of labor's most powerful figures today -- Mr. Stern sets this simple bar for the Obama presidency: "I expect nothing less than what he said he was going to do, and we should hold him accountable."

Labor has its sights on EFCA and this pending legislation has enormous potential consequences for employers. Currently, employers cannot make significant workplace policy or other changes once a union files a petition for election. Under EFCA, there may not be an election, only a card check.  Employers may not be aware of organizing efforts or have insufficient time to react. Employers should be putting into place union avoidance programs before EFCA becomes law. Developing an action plan should include the following items:

  • Assessing union eligibility of working supervisors under RESPECT Act.
  • Educating supervisors on authorization cards and the Nuts and Bolts of EFCA.
  • Adopting union-free policies on solicitation, bulletin boards, and use of e-mail.
  • Initiating engagement surveys.

More information is contained in our prior posts as follows:

Nuts and Bolts of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) and RESPECT

Bosses do not Deserve RESPECT

Why not Educate Employees on the Significance of Union Authorization Cards?

Employee Engagement Surveys may be Critical to Combating Union Organizing Efforts

NOW is the Time for Employers to Gear up for the Employee Free Choice Act (Unions Are)