Posted on 06/23/2004 7:59:25 AM PDT by AttentiveObserver
Los Angeles Daily News
Another sad tale of greedy union leaders Will lobbyists succeed in wiping out California volunteerism altogether?
By Mark Mix Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - This summer, a legislative roadblock in Sacramento could create a multiple charity pileup, halting creek restoration projects across the state, as well as park construction, library renovations, and Habitat for Humanity, a program that builds homes for the poor.
Unbelievably, under current California law, if a nonprofit group receives any taxpayer funding for a charitable venture, and pays even one of the workers on the project, that project may not accept any volunteer help at all, and all workers must be paid the so-called "prevailing" (i.e., union) wage.
And if public funds to cover the immense additional cost aren't available, then guess what? The trees don't get planted, the trash in parks doesn't get picked up, the schools get by without aides, museums operate without guides, and libraries cancel storytelling time.
California's anti-volunteer law has been on the books for several years, but was not strictly enforced. Recently, that changed when union bosses in Redding successfully used it to sue the nonprofit Sacramento Watersheds Action Group (SWAG) for employing volunteers on a state-funded project to clean up a canyon and build a trail for the community. The courts fined SWAG $33,000 and ordered it to provide $17,000 in "back pay" to Shasta College students and other young people who thought they were volunteers.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and his administration strongly favor changing the anti-volunteer law, but have no choice but to keep enforcing it until it's changed.
Unfortunately, despite the fact that Californians on both sides of the aisle are outraged about the law, it may not change any time soon. What could possibly be preventing the Legislature from putting an end to this anti-volunteer law, a law so obviously detrimental to the interests of the Golden State and its citizens?
The answer: Union lobbyists and their grim determination to wipe out what is, in their opinion, a terrible plague -- volunteer work.
California building trades union spokesman Jim Lewis claims that union brass won't oppose a change in the law allowing for "legitimate volunteer work," but then goes on to say that "work that requires the use of skilled labor, heavy equipment, and so on" must be "reimbursed under the prevailing wage law."
In plain English: If you have any skills that are especially valuable to a volunteer organization, it's "illegitimate" for you to volunteer to do what you do best.
According to the questionable criteria clarified by Lewis, AB 2690 -- a measure designed to repeal California's anti-volunteer law and let volunteer groups function as they did before labor officials declared war -- is unacceptable. But union lobbyists aren't so brash as to think they can stop this measure by openly opposing it.
On May 26, after being held up for weeks by Big Labor opposition, AB 2690 won approval from the California Assembly in a unanimous vote. But in the Senate, the bill has yet to be assigned to a committee. A spokesman for the Senate Rules Committee said he had no idea when this bill would be assigned.
While the union-label politicians who run the California Senate decide whether they should risk a public backlash by submitting to the will of union lobbyists -- or instead make a rare stand for common sense -- trail and creek restoration projects, school programs and beach cleanups are put on hold.
Discerning California union bosses' real agenda for trying to protect the anti-volunteer law is not hard. Volunteer workers don't have to pay compulsory union dues to serve their communities, but most paid workers on public projects in California do.
Big labor's ongoing crusade to see that no good deed in California goes unpunished is yet another example of how government-authorized compulsory-union dues corrupt the political process and furnish unscrupulous union officials with an enormous incentive to act against the public interest. It demonstrates yet again why Americans should be determined to wipe out all forms of compulsory unionism.
Mark Mix is president of the National Right to Work Committee.
Socialism at its finest.
How can it be volunteer if you pay people to do it?
Socialism at its finest.
This is the same bunch that wants to give driver's licenses to people who have broken the law to be here.
I can't get out of here fast enough. I know it won't be perfect wherever I go, but I have had enough of Kalifornia.
Volunteers -- that's what they call that stupid program that Slick started. Only thing is they get PAID! What a rip off -- call yourself a volunteer while getting paid. I thought about that and came up with the thought it should now be called SLICKSPEAK -- what is really isn't.
Here is the key passage
Unbelievably, under current California law, if a nonprofit group receives any taxpayer funding for a charitable venture, and pays even one of the workers on the project, that project may not accept any volunteer help at all, and all workers must be paid the so-called "prevailing" (i.e., union) wage.
Example: Habitat-for-Humanity paying one professional contractor and using volunteer labor otherwise. The one professional is to make sure things get done correctly and consistently. Volunteers come and go, and cannot provide continuity or code-compliance.
SchwarzenRINO is in bed with the Kalifornian socialists in the legislature so the state will continue its slide into the Pacific as scheduled.
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.