THE WISCONSIN WAY
THE WISCONSIN WAY
The Wisconsin way
Cracking down on collective bargaining
Squeezing the unions
Feb 17th 2011 | WASHINGTON, DC | from PRINT EDITION
“IF YOU’RE going to negotiate, you’ve got to have something to offer. We don’t.” Thus Scott Walker, Wisconsin’s new governor, explains his refusal to speak to unions about an emergency budget bill that would trim the state’s contribution to its employees’ medical insurance and pensions. In fact, Mr Walker, a Republican, wants to rule out negotiations with unions about benefits in perpetuity. Hence another measure in his bill, which would bar the state government, along with counties and municipalities, from striking deals with unions over anything other than pay rises. Even those would not be allowed, by law, to exceed the inflation rate unless local voters said otherwise in a referendum.
Lots of states, faced with swelling pension and health-care costs and yawning deficits, are seeking to curb public-sector pay and benefits. A few are going further by trying to trim the power of the unions that defend civil servants’ wages. This week Ohio’s legislature took up a measure similar to the one being pushed by Mr Walker in Wisconsin, denying state and local employees collective-bargaining rights. A bill before the Florida Senate would prevent the state from deducting union dues from salaries, and make it harder for unions to spend money electioneering. As it is, many states already limit collective bargaining by public employees in one way or another; and North Carolina, Texas and Virginia ban it altogether.
Mr Walker says his package will save Wisconsin $30m by July, and another $300m over the following two years. The restrictions on collective bargaining, he claims, are needed to force through the other changes without protracted negotiations. Union contracts, he notes, can take a year or more to thrash out. He is particularly keen to relieve the state’s 1,000-odd local jurisdictions of the need to haggle with the unions over benefits. Given the reductions in subsidies to localities he is proposing in his next budget, he wants to be sure that local authorities have foolproof cost-cutting mechanisms at their disposal.
Related topics
But unions retort that the state already has the authority to impose its will on public workers if need be. Moreover, there are several measures in Mr Walker’s proposal that do not have much to do with balancing the books. For example, it would oblige unionised government workplaces to hold an annual ballot to reaffirm the union’s role—a step that is likely to cost money, rather than save it. Steve Kreisberg of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, a big public-sector union, says “this is about trying to abolish the unions, pure and simple.”
Mr Walker himself has muddied the waters by exempting police and firemen from the cutbacks and restrictions. Mr Kreisberg sees this as a reward for the few unions that supported his election campaign (most, including some representing police and firemen, sided with his opponent). Mr Walker argues that the state often treats public-safety workers differently, and is wise to do so, since it cannot do without them in a pinch. But that seems tantamount to accepting that certain unions, at any rate, will continue to hold the state’s finances hostage—not the sort of thing Mr Walker normally puts up with.
from PRINT EDITION | United States