Posted on 03/14/2011 3:37:19 PM PDT by Second Amendment First
Gov. Scott Walker's union bargaining changes will require some 30,000 state workers to hold a do-or-die vote on their unions' futures by the end of April.
The provisions in the Republican governor's budget-repair law also will require 170,000 other local and school union members to vote on whether their union will have to decertify by next year, though it's unclear if they will have to do so in April, according to the head lawyer for the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission. It's just one of the changes that unions will face under the new law, unless legal challenges already under way prevent the measure from being published on March 25 and taking effect then.
To stay alive, the unions will have to meet a much higher standard in their vote than Walker and other state elected officials had to meet to win their offices - getting 51% of the vote of all their union members, not just the ones who actually cast ballots. They also will have to win the vote again every year or their union will cease to function and be unable to reconstitute itself for at least a year after that.
"It may be as energized as (the unions) are this year, they'll do all right in April," said Peter Davis, general counsel for the WERC, which oversees state labor laws. "But to sustain that year after year is probably almost impossible."
Bob McLinn, president of the Wisconsin State Employees Union, which represents blue-collar workers, said the provisions will make it difficult for unions to remain in existence. McLinn said he believes that the point of the governor's law was to weaken and end public-sector unions that typically support Democratic candidates.
"His whole intent is to stop unions and make it impossible for unions to exist. It will make it extremely difficult and he knows it," McLinn said.
Walker's bill resolves about $37.5 million of the state's $137 million shortfall in the current fiscal year ending June 30.
Walker spokesman Cullen Werwie said he would have a comment on the issue later Monday. But Walker has said repeatedly that he believes allowing workers to choose whether to be part of a union is fundamental to democracy. He also has said that restricting unions' bargaining is important to help state and local governments close budget shortfalls both in the current fiscal year and over the following two years.
Except for unions representing local police, firefighters and State Patrol troopers, Walker's law will have major effects on public employee unions the state. The law will:
• Restrict bargaining by unions to wages. Salary increases would still be limited to the rate of inflation unless approved by voters in a referendum.
• Forbid local governments to collect union dues from employees' paychecks.
• Allow state workers to opt out of paying any dues to a union. Previously, state workers had to pay most of the union dues even if they didn't belong to a union, since labor groups said those employees were benefiting from the bargaining done by the union.
• Allow state workers to be fired if the governor declares a state of emergency and they go on strike or don't show up for work for any three days without being excused.
Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald said late last week that the law is needed to improve the state's finances and protect taxpayers.
"This change absolutely gets Wisconsin closer to a balanced budget, a greater balance between the public and private sectors, and most importantly, it prevents deep, real layoffs at both the state and the local levels," Fitzgerald said in a statement. "I was elected with a clear agenda: improve the economy and create jobs. Somehow, the union bullhorn has made people forget that this agenda - getting Wisconsin back on the right track - is what's really at stake here."
Walker's law is currently being challenged in Dane County court by Democratic officials who say it was not properly approved by the GOP-controlled Legislature. A court hearing is scheduled for Wednesday in that case.
If that court challenges does not succeed in the meantime, Secretary of State Doug La Follette said Monday that he would publish the bill as required by law on March 25.
Davis said the changes in the state law would not immediately affect unions that already have a contract in place that contains different language on these issues. But the changes would take effect once those contracts expire, he said.
Unions said provisions of the recertification vote would put an unusual burden on them.
Both McLinn and Davis said many state elected officials would not meet the criteria of getting 51% of the total voters eligible to cast ballots in an election. That's because many people eligible to vote in general elections don't do so.
Walker "wouldn't be governor under the rule that he established," McLinn said.
McLinn estimated that on a typical vote of his union, such as a vote on a contract, about 35% of union members participate.
In November, Walker received 1.13 million votes, or 52.3% of the total number of 2.16 ballots cast in the governor's race. But that majority was only of the votes actually cast by electors.
According to the state Government Accountability Board, there were 3.49 million voters registered to vote in that election. Of that number, Walker received only 32.3%. There were an even larger number - more than 4 million people in the state - who were old enough to be able to vote.
Most statewide races for U.S. senator, attorney general and other offices had about the same number of votes cast as the race for Wisconsin governor.
Except for unions representing local police, firefighters and State Patrol troopers, Walker's law will have major effects on public employee unions the state. The law will:
• Restrict bargaining by unions to wages. Salary increases would still be limited to the rate of inflation unless approved by voters in a referendum.
• Forbid local governments to collect union dues from employees' paychecks.
• Allow state workers to opt out of paying any dues to a union. Previously, state workers had to pay most of the union dues even if they didn't belong to a union, since labor groups said those employees were benefiting from the bargaining done by the union.
• Allow state workers to be fired if the governor declares a state of emergency and they go on strike or don't show up for work for any three days without being excused.
Sounds like more extremist rhetoric. < /sarc >
Goes into effect next week, unless the thugs shut down the government again.
Ping Pong
Let the "workers" actually have the money in their hands, and make THEM responsable for sending their dues in to the unions!
I'll bet that would work REAL well, huh?
Probably be a HUGE market for KNEE REPLACEMENTS
The state will no longer be responsible for collecting union dues. In about two months, the union thugs will have to try to collect on their own. That should make the annual re-certification more difficult; and the unions will have less money to “persuade” those reluctant to continue with a union.
I think Walker was willing to negotiate on the certification elections, but since the fleebaggers weren’t negotiating in good faith he didn’t have to give on them. They really screwed themselves.
Wonder which inflation rate they will use. Real inflation counting fuel and food, or the fixed numbers the government gives us.
Yep, they could have come back and had three year re-certification.
Walker isn't re-writing election law, numb nuts.
This is a diversionary tactic. Walker didn't declare himself governor for life.
Since the unions cannot be denied the freedoms (association, speech, etc.) they can be forced to defend themselves.
Union thuggery has run amock for years.
Payback’s a bitch.
Attention!
The bill does not go into effect until it is published - and I believe I just heard that it will NOT be published (union lover in charge of publication).
>>> “They also will have to win the vote again every year or their union will cease to function and be unable to reconstitute itself for at least a year after that.”<<<
I just don’t understand. If the union is such a great, almighty wonderful thing that the thugs are proclaiming it to be, why will it be hard for them to convince their rank and file to vote annually to confirm their membership or the union’s existence?
If all those teachers and students (and bussed in union thugs) marching in Madison and flooding the state house were any indication, I can’t see where the union is going to have any problem getting all the ‘voluntary’ votes needed. Why they’ll have to rent out a large stadium each year just to accommodate those huge numbers of workers who just want to support their unions at vote time.
As a dumb conservative, I just don’t get it... couldn’t be that there might just be more anti-union sentiment out there than the unions want to let on... nawwwwwwwww!
I read earlier somewhere that it is to be published a week from Friday, the 25th.
Every time a union falls, another angel get’s it’s wings.
They shall find out soon. Tennessee has nabbed Nissan and Volkswagon. South Carolina nabbed a good chunk of Boeing. Don’t tell me the goons didn’t notice.
I'll take the latter.
Walker asked that it be published after he signed it. Democrat Secretary of State Doug LaFollette is holding it for 10 business days before publishing it. Meanwhile, new contracts are being negotiated and signed by local government agencies before it goes into effect. Another Dem dirty trick....
Ah Bob, I see you get it now. The shoe is on the other foot. How many times have your DemoRat overlords passed crap that was supposed to benefit everybody but was designed to punish a specific group, primarily conservatives and taxpayers?
(Cue microscopic violin)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.