February 3, 2012 

 LEGISLATIVE REPORT

The 2012 Legislative session is well underway at the first “cutoff” (policy bills must clear committees or be effectively “dead”). “Fiscal Committees” (issues which cost money) have an additional week. This significantly reduces the number of issues arising daily but moves into another phase where legislators are able to amend bills and make changes. Our two big issues are going to be discussed until the last day but the bills themselves need to pass these critical dates to go forward. The next phase will be that each house “go to the floor” for passage. Following a week or so of “floor action,” the whole cycle begins again before attention turns to the budget. At that point, K-12 educational and other public employees anticipate additional issues to arise which will require constant monitoring. I will outline several broad issues that have dominated our efforts this session thus far.

K-12 Health Benefit Consolidation-

SB 6442 (Hobbs D-Mill Creek)/HB 2724 ( Rep. Eddy d-Medina)-These bills proposing a state take-over of locally bargained health benefits for school employees have been introduced and the Senate bill “heard”, There has been hourly, daily and weekly action that has been as intense as I have ever experienced. We testified in the Senate Health Care Committee as to the tremendous harm that a poorly crafted bill would do to our members when simple changes could be made in state laws governing benefits and accomplish the same purposes at no cost.

Our priorities are clear:

First:  Full scope local collective bargaining for school employees must be preserved and protected. Second: employees must gradually move to a system that ensures more equity for families that are facing large out of pocket costs while singles pay nothing. Third: some level of administrative efficiencies must be attained by limiting the number of pools in local districts and what are called “Cadillac” health plans.

For example: the “over 1000” separate benefit pools which exist in school districts around Washington are admittedly very inefficient. For that reason, we advocate limiting such pools to only one per district so that all employees can be part of the largest group possible with the least administration necessary. If absolutely reflective of local needs, a separate pool could be agreed to for local reasons (such as having all “represented” employees in one and the “non-represented” in another.) The idea of “regional pools” for smaller districts has been attractive to legislators.

I repeat the Operating Engineers have followed a path of maximizing access to health benefits and ensuring that our lowest paid members, who are frequently part-time, have maximum benefits and access. We ensure that every dollar in the pools go towards benefits for as many as is feasible.

For this reason, we have proposed that some minimal contribution be required of every employee to be locally negotiated so that costs are spread and family coverage would be affordable. It is estimated that if such a charge of one hours pay be locally negotiated so that the costs would be higher for those who can better afford to pay them, families would be covered with no further costs to employees. Like many employers in both the private and public sector, a low cost plan would cost less (premium co-pay) than more expensive plans so that if an employee chose Group Health they would pay a significantly lower cost than if they chose the Premera Plan.

It’s a tremendous problem and the furious debate has now been going on for weeks. We chase Senators around to ensure our adversaries can’t mislead them as this is a very complex issue.

This much is for certain: some big changes are in store for school employee benefits. The Health Care Authority is still not able to say that the takeover will save money. Our goal remains to show them a different approach that protects our member’s costs.

We continue to also seek modifications to any bill in this area, to allow for districts to “opt out” of its coverage and that local benefit Trusts (such as exist in Tacoma, Everett and other districts) can continue serving their members.

The Washington State Labor Council and several of its subordinate bodies, have joined the Teamsters, AFT, Laborers and the Washington Education Association and us in this fight.  

HB 2666 (Rep. Sullivan D-Covington)/ SB 6553 (Sen. Prentice D-Renton) have been introduced at our request which will preserve local collective bargaining while increasing equity, efficiency and accountability. We will need all members to weigh in with their legislators.

WE OPPOSE SB 6442 and HB 2724 WHICH ARE BOTH PROPOSALS TO REMOVE HEALTH BENEFITS FROM LOCAL COLLECTIVE BARGAINING IN SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

WE SUPPORT SB 6553 AND HB 2666 AS AFFORDABLE SOLUTIONS THAT DON’T REQUIRE THAT WE GIVE UP OUR BARGAINING RIGHTS.

CHARTER SCHOOLS-

HB 2428 (Pettigrew D-37^th) and SB 6202 (Tom D-Medina) were both introduced despite voters rejecting them three times in the recent past. Both bills have happily died for this year because they failed to get out of committee. As in the past, these require public money be used to pay for (essentially) for-profit private schools which be required to be non-union. Both proposals would have barred employees of the “host” school district’s bargaining unit from working at the charters. Charter employees would be required to be separate so (for example) the custodian and food service employees would be essentially denied representation and their service at the charter would count for no future promotions, etc.

At this point, it is widely expected that anti-union forces in service to the “1%” will most probably use their fortunes to put the issue on the ballot this year as an initiative.

WE OPPOSE NON-UNION CHARTER SCHOOLS IN WASHINGTON STATE and both of these bills. The people have spoken and probably will again.

PENSIONS

SB 6378 (Zarelli R-Vancouver and Baumgartner R-Spokane) The Senate Republicans are up to their usual tricks proposing that all early retirement reduction factors (“ERRF’s”) be repealed and that all new employee lose the choice and be mandated into SERS Plan 3 after next July 1. Those ERRF’s are extremely important for Plan 2 & 3 members who have served the public for many years to be able to choose a modestly reduced retirement in order to retire before age 65. The loss of the option to choose which plan is best as individuals was also hard fought for and we will fight to prevent its passage. The bill was heard in the Senate Ways & Means Committee yesterday and all unions of public employees (including us) were opposed. We testified and believe the bill will die.

WE OPPOSE SB 6378 AND ANY OTHER PROPOSALS WHICH WEAKEN OUR RETIREMENT PLANS.

Remember, our unified strengths in the areas of legislative actions are our communicating our priorities to elected leaders and holding them accountable. Each and every one of us needs to communicate our positions to policy makers (via the Legislative Hotline 1-800-562-6000 or click on the Find Your Legislator link (type in your address and a map will appear of your district, click on a legislator and their home page will appear, click email and follow instructions) frequently. Or, go to your Local’s webpage and use the link to send an email. Please take the time to do so on the above issue. It makes everything we do in the halls of the capital much more effective.

As always, thank you for your continuing support.

Senate Bill 6442 will increase taxpayer costs, expand bureaucracy, eliminate competition and reduce benefits.

A state takeover of K-12 educators’ health benefit plans would provide no cost savings and will actually cost taxpayers millions of dollars. SB 6442 and its companion bill, House Bill 2724, also will cost school employees more, reduce benefits and limit choices. It also eliminates local decision-making about educator health benefits. That’s why educators oppose Senate Bill 6442 and House Bill 2724.

Brothers and sisters:

An injury to one is an injury to all. Please read the fact sheet then click the link below to let the governor and legislators know how you feel.

There is a website set up so that anyone, including us, can send a message to the governor and the legislators. Simply follow this link:

https://secure3.convio.net/wea/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=395

Fill in the form and send.

Together, we can stop this state takeover and keep our bargaining rights. Please take a few minutes and send your message.

Thank you for your support,

David M. Maxwell

Our Local

Although we are a Stationary Engineer Local, many would be surprised at the diverse and varied kinds of work our union members perform. The Local represents members in school districts, zoos, hospitals and medical centers, food processing and distribution centers, city and county governments, laundries, property management organizations, and utility districts.

Each organization where we have members has its own unique rules, policies, and procedures which must be taken into account when labor agreements are negotiated; many of our union standards are common to all locations. The concept of seniority in job selection, promotion, lay-off, and recall is a concept we strive to achieve for all members, regardless of the type of organization in which they work. “Just cause” for discipline or discharge, equal employment, license requirements, holiday and vacation language, benefits, shift premiums, medical insurance language for members and their dependents, and pensions are benefits and topics that are common among most, if not all, of our groups.

Not all subjects of bargaining are created equal.  To some people, wage increases are more important than pension increases.  Others may value health care benefits more than either wages or pension.  Some may consider language regarding job security, contracting out, or seniority to be of primary importance.  The priorities are as many and varied as our membership.  Just as we do not value all subjects of bargaining the same, the law does not treat all subjects of bargaining the same.

   The courts have decided that some subjects of bargaining are mandatory, while others are permissive, and still others are illegal.  Mandatory subjects of bargaining are wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment.  Permissive subjects of bargaining are those that are not mandatory, or in other words, those that are outside of the scope of wages, hours, and working conditions, and not illegal.  Illegal subjects of bargaining are those that conflict with either state or federal law.  Examples of mandatory subjects of bargaining are: wages, pension, health and welfare, hours, seniority, management rights, discipline, grievance procedures, and health and safety issues.  Examples of permissive subjects of bargaining are: definition of the bargaining unit, union-recognition clause, internal union affairs, and settlement of unfair labor practice charges.  Examples of illegal subjects of bargaining are: closed shop clauses and hot-cargo clauses.

   The law treats mandatory, permissive and illegal subjects of bargaining differently.  The difference comes into play when one party to the bargaining insists on a subject to impasse.  While there is a duty to bargain, there is not a duty to reach an agreement.  There is nothing illegal about an employer insisting on a mandatory subject of bargaining to impasse.  This is not so with permissive and/or illegal subjects of bargaining.  A party to a bargain commits an unfair labor practice when it insists to impasse on either a permissive or an illegal subject of bargaining.

   Not all subjects of bargaining are created equal.  Different people place different values on different subjects.  And the law requires us to bargain some subjects, and also makes it illegal to insist on bargaining others.

It is important to many Americans to secure a good union job with a wage that can support a family, provides health and welfare, and a good retirement.

   Many people in our society who are currently taking shots at public employee retirements forget that most public employees work for a lesser salary than their counterparts doing the same job in the private sector. Most times when people talk about those “huge” retirements, they are using the salaries of the highest earners in the public sector, such as large city managers, not the employees with union representation. The average public employee in Western Washington earns about $20 an hour. Let’s say an employee started working in the public sector 30 years ago for an employer participating in Washington’s Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS), when they retire they will be making around $25,000 per year.  And public employees receive little-to-no health-care coverage as part of their retirement.

   A recent conversation got around to public employee retirements and it was said that, “We have to do something about all these huge public employee retirements; we just can’t afford them.” But it could not be determined where the information about public employee retirements was heard or who it was about exactly. Remember to consider the source when you hear information like this and to find out exactly who it is about.

   And let’s talk about the importance of employers keeping their promises and honoring their agreements and about how the government had stepped in to dismantle the airline pilots’ pensions and how unfair it was to deny retirements to people who had worked for them as part of their compensation packages. Think about the time in your life when you may not be able to work and need your retirement.

 “To remember the loneliness, the fear and the insecurity of men who once had to walk alone in huge factories, beside huge machines—to realize that labor unions have meant new dignity and pride to millions of our countrymen—human companionship on the job, and music in the home—to be able to see what larger pay checks mean, not to a man as an employee, but as a husband and as a father—to know these things is to understand what American labor means.”

Adlai Stevenson speech September 22, 1952

Not surprisingly, unions are very important to many Americans.  The difference in union jobs is that union positions pay better, have better hours, better benefits and do not always end in the dreaded layoffs that plagued families too many times.  More than that, union jobs give people a voice, so they are more inclined to participate in their own future, using the union to speak up to address wrongs that they witnessed by management done both to them and their fellow coworkers. 

    Some of the most important life lessons taught by unions are to value honesty, cooperation, reasonableness, and most importantly, personal and professional dignity or pride in a job well done.  It is believed all of these values are what makes belonging to a union so powerful. Unions help people to develop personally by investing in what they do professionally. 

   The National Labor Relations Board explains that the purpose of the creation of the National Labor Relations Act was to protect some of these core values.  “Congress enacted the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA") in 1935 to protect the rights of employees and employers, to encourage collective bargaining, and to curtail certain private sector labor and management practices, which can harm the general welfare of workers, businesses and the U.S. economy.”  The key here is the idea that by working together, both the employees through their unions and management, we all can promote the values of working people which will benefit not only the employees and the employer, but also society as a whole.  Indeed, the AFL-CIO’s mission statement sums it up well when it states, “The mission of the AFL-CIO is to improve the lives of working families, and to bring economic justice to the workplace and social justice to our nation.”  Notice that the AFL-CIO’s mission is not just for union members or union families, but to improve workplace rights for all people.

   What IUOE members need to realize is the difference between having a voice and being stifled in the workplace.  If you speak with some employees that are unorganized and work for non-union employers, you will notice that they have to accept whatever the employer gives them or risk losing their jobs.  However, you have the fortune of a collective bargaining agreement and union membership which means that you have a voice and you have rights.  The ability to have grievances filed on your behalf gives you rights, the ability to have the union to arbitrate grievances gives you rights, the ability to go to union meetings, vote and speak up gives you rights.  But you have to know your rights and take an active role in them.  You cannot take them for granted.

   It may be easy with the current middle class ideas of eight-hour workdays, weekends off, and improved wages to take for granted what many people fought for through the labor movement.  However, realize that nation-wide union memberships have declined significantly to around 11% in 2010 according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.  Additionally, there are some powerful forces at play attempting to destroy the unions.  The answer to this problem is to be informed and get involved.

GET INVOLVED WITH YOUR UNION

If you want to keep what you have, every member needs to get active to preserve their rights. Union membership is about participating in what is happening within your bargaining unit.

By attending meetings, you get updated on things that are happening at your workplace, and information is shared on things that are being discussed at Labor/Management Meetings throughout the year at these meetings.

Generally, your shop stewards are there to be your first line of communication if something is not right within the workplace. Seek those stewards out if you find yourself being questioned about something you are being accused of, or if you believe you have a grievance. They are there to help you.

And, as always you can make a call to your business representative.

TIP:  Know your contract, and know your employee rights.

ORGANIZE!

SOLIDARITY

The Dictionary defines "Solidarity" as: union or fellowship arising from common responsibilities and interests, as between members of a group or between classes, peoples, etc.: to promote solidarity among union members.