Stephen Cabot's Blog | Labor Relations

TAG | Wisconsin

From the desk of Steve Cabot:

Since the soothsayer’s warning to Julius Caesar, the Ides of March has carried a dark connotation of doom and betrayal by someone close – a trusted advocate or ally. And that’s what came to mind as I read several items within the past week which highlighted the increasing divergence between the priorities of Organized Labor and the workers they claim to represent.

Here we are, still mired in the worst economic times since the Great Depression, and what do we hear from the union bosses – words of concern and a willingness to work with management to save jobs and build productivity? Not even close.

In a recent interview, AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka spelled out his commitment to partner with radical (which he calls Progressive) political action groups to push the Far Left agenda of this administration. These are ideologically-driven efforts utterly disconnected with – and often in direct opposition to – the well-being of the American worker.

Is it any surprise, then, that employees – at least in the private sector – are questioning the value (and values) of their union leaders?  They see the abuses, the pointlessly confrontational attitude toward management, the unauthorized allocation of dues to political purposes antithetical to their interests, the intimidation in organizing elections, and the general hijacking of their rights. And increasingly, they don’t like it.

But out of this disillusionment has come great opportunity. For years, the Cabot Institute has believed in – and counseled clients to embrace – a WIN/WIN approach in the workplace, one that sees employees as partners, not pawns. One that rejects us/them in favor of a true shared vision.

And today, more than ever, we are seeing the fruits of this philosophy. I encourage you to reach out to discuss the specific ways we can assess your situation and suggest the best strategies going forward. You can call me directly on my cell phone (215-990-3423) or contact Georgetta McCabe, my administrative assistant, on her direct line: 800-655-2042.

· · · · · · · · ·

Feb/12

11

ERA: RANK-AND-FILE REVOLT?

From the desk of Steve Cabot:

It has always suited union bosses to paint employers as privileged ogres getting rich off the backs of their workers. Envy and resentment are emotions easily stoked and manipulated, and Big Labor has been shameless in using “us/them” rhetoric to distract the rank-and-file from the real workplace abuses, namely their loss of individual rights.

Times are changing, however. Workers have begun to shake off their shackles and support measures restoring their liberty. One of the key pieces of legislation codifying these reforms is the Employee Rights Act (ERA), introduced in August 2011. The measure has been bottled up in committee by the Democrat majority in the Senate, but there appears to be a renewed groundswell of support for its passage, with at least 70% of union households now endorsing its key provisions. (See my September 2011 blog entry below for more specifics.)

While passage of an intact ERA is unlikely before this fall’s elections, supporters in Congress will attempt to attach individual elements to other legislation destined for a presidential signature. I’ll keep you posted on the latest developments as they unfold.

In other encouraging news, freedom of choice for employers and their workers got a big boost when Indiana became the 23rd right-to-work state, the first in the “rust belt” to do so. Unfortunately, the pushback against forced unionism has hit resistance elsewhere in union strongholds like Wisconsin, where the threat (and actuality) of recall elections has weakened the resolve of some reformers.

Whatever the political developments this year, however, we know the Obama administration will continue to push its anti-employer agenda – with or without constitutional authority. And should you find your organization needing assistance with any labor relations matters, I encourage you to call me directly on my cell phone (215-990-3423) or contact Georgetta McCabe, my administrative assistant, on her direct line: 800-655-2042.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

From the desk of Steve Cabot:

I wasn’t too surprised when Organized Labor decided to throw in with the motley mobs currently laying siege to cities across the country. After all, they have a lot in common. The anti-capitalist, redistributionist rhetoric coming from the agitators is standard fare at union rallies, and the paramilitary tactics of intimidation, disruption, and forcible occupation of public and private property are right out of the SEIU handbook.

The truth is, this is a natural – if unholy – alliance:  the demonstrators want to weaken corporations and demonize profits, and the labor unions are more than happy to provide logistical and financial assistance as a means of building their own public support and political power. For them, this is simply another step toward their goal of reestablishing workplace hegemony.

This is an ongoing saga, one with significant long-term implications. If you’re interested in learning more about the state of Organized Labor today and its impact on our economy, I invite you to read a compelling special report just released by Human Events entitled, The Big Labor Stranglehold:  Killing Jobs & Hurting America.” Written by Dr. Carl F. Horowitz, project manager for the National Legal and Policy Center, this 26-page report looks beyond the well-publicized but misleading statistics about declining union membership and documents the strategies, goals, impact, and prospects of Big Labor in America.

To receive your complimentary copy, simply click here or on the image below to go to the Human Events website. Once you register, a pdf version of the report will be sent directly to the email address you specify.

For assistance with any labor relations issues, I encourage you to call me on my cell phone (215-990-3423) or contact Georgetta McCabe, my administrative assistant, on her direct line: 800-655-2042.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

Angela Greiling Keane reported on Bloomberg News that the U. S. Postal Service negotiated a 4 ½ year contract with the American Postal Workers, which has 202,000 members. She quotes Representative Darrell Issa, a California Republican, as stating: “We have deep concerns that some of the provisions of the contract may in fact be the wrong direction, to less flexibility, less ability to trim the workforce and less ability to in the future make the kinds of investments we need to make.”

The new contract will not stem the tide of enormous losses; and it will certainly not lead to a renaissance of profitability for the postal service, which has suffered losses for the last five quarters. Its labor costs are a whopping 80% of its total budget, while labor costs for UPS are 69% of its operating budget, and 43% for the operating budget of FedEx, which is staffed by a combination of employees and independent contractors.

Until the postal service can bring its labor costs in line with private sector employers such as UPS and FedEx, it will continue to run huge billion-dollar deficits. The sorry state of the U. S. Postal Service is just another example of how public-sector unions drive companies into the ground. The goals of the governors of Ohio and Wisconsin should become the goals of a fiscally responsible federal government.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

From the Desk of Stephen Cabot:

Following the lead of Wisconsin and Ohio, Governor David Heineman of Nebraska and Republican lawmakers have decided to rein in the ever-growing power of public sector unions. They have introduced legislation that would curtail the power of the state’s Commission of Industrial Relations, which adjudicates labor disputes.
The proposed legislation would not only curtail the power of the Commission (which many view as pro-labor) to set wages and work conditions, but it would also remove its jurisdiction over retirement and healthcare benefits, especially for teachers.
Not only are lawmakers dissatisfied with the Commission, but they are worried about the state’s budget deficit which is projected to be $943 million over the next two years.
The Commission was created in 1947 as a result of a debilitating utility workers strike, and Nebraska became one of 31 states with commissions that adjudicate labor disputes.
Governor Heineman has declared that if the reform of the Commission does not take place, he will work to generate a ballot initiative that would call for the elimination of the Commission.
The ongoing efforts to increase productivity and reduce the power of public-sector unions are fast becoming one of the most important labor relations trends of the year; and if those efforts are successful, all Americans will benefit from reduced taxes and higher levels of employment.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

FROM THE DESK OF STEPHEN CABOT:

Tax payers, long upset about the extortionate powers of public-sector unions, are giving their whole-hearted support to courageous governors who are determined to curtail the inordinate money grabs made by those public-sector unions.

It started in Wisconsin, where Governor Scott Walker stood his ground against aggressive and often abusive pro-union demonstrators, and it has now spread to Ohio, where Governor John Kasich is proving to be even tougher than his neighbor Governor Walker.

While the Wisconsin law would permit workers to negotiate inflation-adjusted wages based on seniority, the law proposed in Ohio by Governor Kasich would permit workers to negotiate wages based on performance and merit only. In the private sector, workers normally receive salary increases based on performance and merit. The two are naturally tied together. And Governor Kasich would like to public-sector workers to be as responsible as private-sector workers are.

In addition, Ohio, unlike Wisconsin, would restrict negotiations on health insurance, sick leave, and vacations to the same level as those enjoyed by non-union government workers. In other words, there should be one rule for everyone: union workers should not be entitled to greater benefits than their non-union colleagues.

Again, unlike Wisconsin, Ohio would not permit unions to negotiate levels of staffing, teacher-student ratios, disciplinary procedures, and outsourcing. And binding arbitration to settle contract disputes would be eliminated. Finally, the same rules that don’t permit police and fire fighters to strike would apply to all government employees.

States, counties, and cities can no longer afford to spend outrageously large sums of money to meet the demands of avaricious unions. Debts are crippling states, and taxes are over-burdening the middle class. It’s time for public-sector unions to live by the same rules that govern free markets.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Mar/11

11

REALITY SWEEPS ACROSS MIDDLE AMERICA

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

After years of being over taxed to pay the outrageous salaries, benefits, and pensions of public sector employees, four principled Republican governors decided to turn back the collective bargaining clock and make public-sector and even some private-sector unions responsible to all citizens.

It has taken considerable courage on the part of the governors of Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio, and Idaho to face down angry, vituperative mobs who have attempted to block legislative buildings and intimidate legislators. But, the governors stood firm, for they know that they have the vast majority of the citizens on their side. And those citizens expect their governors to balance state budgets and reign in extortionate unions without imposing ever more burdensome taxes.

In Wisconsin, collective bargaining by public sector workers would be restricted to salaries only, and legislation would require unions to permit members to vote annually about whether they want to remain unionized. In Indiana, proposed new legislation would prohibit unions from collecting union dues. In Ohio, collective bargaining and binding arbitration for public-sector workers would end. Legislation would also permit the hiring of replacement workers during strikes. In Idaho, collective bargaining by teachers would be limited to salaries and benefits. In addition, tenure would be phased out for teachers.

Altogether, governors in the Midwest have taken courageous stands, ones that should stiffen the spines of other governors across the country

· · · · · · · · · · · · ·

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

Right-to-work states are growing faster than states where unionization is the norm. A study by Richard Vedder, published in the Cato Journal, found that 4.7 million U. S. citizens moved to right-to-work states from forced-union states during the years 2000 to 2008. In addition, his study found that there is a “statistically significant relationship between right-to-work laws and economic growth.” In fact, during the years 1997 to 2007, those right-to-work states enjoyed a 23% more rapid growth rate for per capita income than states in the Northeast and Midwest.

Not only are jobs and people leaving the forced-union states, but companies, domestic and foreign, are choosing to build new manufacturing facilities in right-to-work states, primarily in the South. Such trends do not portend an economic resurgence for forced-union states. The onerous deficits that are hurting those states will only get worse.

And governors and state legislatures realize that one ailment keeping their economies on life support are unions. It is no wonder then that three states are considering becoming right-to-work states. They are Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Those states, like their neighbors in the northeast, desperately need new businesses, greater employment, and more tax dollars. The only way they will grow their economies and achieve their goals is to become right-to-work states. Other states should take notice and join the trend to economic growth.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Disclaimer: Although this blog may be helpful in informing clients and others who have an interest in labor relations issues, it is not intended to be legal advice. The thoughts offered in this space refer to complex matters, and the significance of them – i.e. how they might apply (or not) to any particular individual or organization – may vary considerably. Readers should not rely on the information or opinions expressed in this blog as a substitute for competent legal or consultative advice specific to their circumstances.