Then do it, already
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Gov. Bruce Rauner spoke recently at an Illinois Chamber function and talked about his collective bargaining proposal…
“And what some people say to me, ‘Well, you’re just trying to strip away collective bargaining.’ No, I’m not. I just want to do what Chicago has done, and Massachusetts has done and others. When it’s necessary to protect taxpayers, give the ability for you in each community to take something out of collective bargaining if it’s necessary.
“Chicago has done this for years. And when the Democratic super-majority says to me, ‘Governor, you’ve proposed that, that’s a violation of our core beliefs.’
“Well that’s baloney.
“You’ve done it for Chicago for years. You’ve taken school day out of collective bargaining. Length of school year out of collective bargaining. Outside contracting out of collective bargaining. And right now the mayor has asked that the teachers’ pension contribution get taken out of collective bargaining.
“Why does Chicago get that and Springfield doesn’t get that? Decatur doesn’t get that. Peoria doesn’t get that. What’s, what’s going on? It’s not fair. We should treat everybody the same in Illinois.”
This is a great argument. It is unfair for Chicago to have these exemptions that nobody else has.
* I just wish the governor’s rhetoric matched his actual proposal…
Prohibited subjects of bargaining.
(a) A public employer and a labor organization may not bargain over, and no collective bargaining agreement entered into, renewed, or extended on or after the effective date of
this amendatory Act of the 99th General Assembly may include,
provisions related to the following prohibited subjects of collective bargaining:
(1) Employee pensions, including the impact or
implementation of changes to employee pensions, including
the Employee Consideration Pension Transition Program as
set forth in Section 30 of the Personnel Code.
(2) Wages, including any form of compensation including salaries, overtime compensation, vacations,
holidays, and any fringe benefits, including the impact or
implementation of changes to the same; except nothing in
this Section 7.6 will prohibit the employer from electing
to bargain collectively over employer-provided health insurance.
(3) Hours of work, including work schedules, shift
schedules, overtime hours, compensatory time, and lunch periods, including the impact or implementation of changes
to the same.
(4) Matters of employee tenure, including the impact of
employee tenure or time in service on the employer’s
exercise of authority including, but not limited to, any
consideration the employer must give to the tenure of
employees adversely affected by the employer’s exercise of management’s right to conduct a layoff.
* If the governor would propose a bill which gives suburban and Downstate schools the same options to limit collective bargaining as Chicago already has, then he’d have a much better argument, and we might be on the road to a deal.
To me, anyway, that would be a big Rauner victory. He’s right that it’s the fair thing to do, and he’s right that the Democrats have already agreed to these ideas for the state’s largest city.
So propose a freaking bill already and put the Democrats on the spot. Unless, of course, he doesn’t want a deal.
- Former State Employee - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:05 pm:
Unfortunately, I think your last sentence is the reason we haven’t seen it.
- Thoughts Matter - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:07 pm:
Well, governor, since you started it…
Decatur, Springfield, Peoria, etc. don’t like being expected to do what Chicago does, anymore than we like Washington telling us what to do. Find another way.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:10 pm:
===* If the governor would propose a bill which gives suburban and Downstate schools the same options to limit collective bargaining as Chicago already has, then he’d have a much better argument, and we might be on the road to a deal.===
This. All day, this.
Only effective Legislative and Press Shops, together, understanding this simple truth, can make this easy “next step” gain the proper steam to get closer to a real deal.
===To me, anyway, that would be a big Rauner victory.===
I agree. A matching bill that makes equal all unions that wasn’t in place before? Thats huge, in my opinion.
===He’s right that it’s the fair thing to do, and he’s right that the Democrats have already agreed to these ideas for the state’s largest city.===
This, again, framing this in the context of what exists, not new, exists, and what has already been done… yikes, that’s hard to argue against. Again, Crew and Staff… failure… to convince Rauner where the “wins” are. Geez. Ugh.
Only a Raunerite would take on “everyone” instead of seeing the openings through the prisms of partisan party accomplishments that can box out the opposing party.
Rauner doesn’t want a deal or to win, Rauner keeps saying he wants to win, but completely win, and only win under his terms,
Politics doesn’t work that way. Do the doable, box your opponent, make the deal, claim victory… and move on!
But first, realize what the heck you’re doin’ and Staff and Crew, sell the win.
Please.
- sangamo better blues - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:11 pm:
“It’s not fair. We should treat everybody the same in Illinois.”…. Wait, wasn’t he proposing to do exactly the opposite with his Right to Work zones?
- GA Watcher - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:11 pm:
Two reasons Springfield, Decatur and Peoria haven’t asked to remove the education-related subjects the Governor mentioned from collective bargaining: 1)the Cities of Springfield, Decatur and Peoria don’t run their schools like Chicago does; and 2) the school districts in those cities haven’t requested them either. I also don’t recall any of the member organizations of the Illinois Statewide School Management Alliance requesting that certain subjects be removed from collective bargaining.
- Honeybear - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:11 pm:
Unless, of course, he doesn’t want a deal.
Bingo
Perfidious Rauner will say whatever has to be said to confuse, obfuscate, distract from his real aim of destroying ALL Labor.
You know I almost prefer the straight up corruption of Blago. Actually I do prefer it. Until Rauner is honest with his intentions and aims, I prefer honest corruption to Governor Perfidy.
- tominchicago - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:17 pm:
Why don’t the Dems call Rauner’s bluff and extend those collective bargaining prohibitions to all school districts in the state?
- Juvenal - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:20 pm:
=== So propose a freaking bill already and put the Democrats on the spot. Unless, of course, he doesn’t want a deal. ===
I think quite a few Republicans would be in a pickle too, Rich, which is why I think again that gridlock is a feature, not a bug.
- Nick Name - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:21 pm:
“Unless, of course, he doesn’t want a deal.”
He doesn’t want a deal.
Governor’s own. And this governor lies. And what does he not do? Care.
He doesn’t want a deal.
- RNUG - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:25 pm:
== And right now the mayor has asked that the teachers’ pension contribution get taken out of collective bargaining. ==
To be clear, what the mayor is asking for is the removal of the school district picking up the teacher’s (employee) portion of the contribution, NOT completely removing pension benefits from bargaining which is what Rauner apparently wants.
- Papa2008 - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:28 pm:
I’ve written this in the past and no one has taken the opportunity to refute: Rauner doesn’t want to destroy labor unions. If he did he would just offer a contract with all of AFSCME’s demands, but remove dues check off. Members would overwhelmingly approve and AFSCME would go broke. Very few would voluntarily pay the union dues. I don’t know what he wants, but AFSCME destruction isn’t it. Somebody show me the flaw in this.
- Carhartt Representative - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:30 pm:
The problem is when you take things out of the collective bargaining process, it becomes all about money. This creates more strikes and at the same time increases salaries. If some district decides to make the school year longer, the teachers can’t negotiate that. Instead, they negotiate extra pay because they’re working longer hours. The less that can be negotiated, the more it has to be about money.
- Nick Name - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:31 pm:
“Somebody show me the flaw in this.”
Rauner would not be able to sneak that past the AFSCME bargaining team?
- tominchicago - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:32 pm:
- Papa2008 - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:28 pm:
I’ve written this in the past and no one has taken the opportunity to refute: Rauner doesn’t want to destroy labor unions. If he did he would just offer a contract with all of AFSCME’s demands, but remove dues check off. Members would overwhelmingly approve and AFSCME would go broke. Very few would voluntarily pay the union dues. I don’t know what he wants, but AFSCME destruction isn’t it. Somebody show me the flaw in this.
I don’t believe that union dues are a matter to be collectively bargained. I believe that they are a matter of state law.
- IllinoisBoi - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:33 pm:
Again, public employees aren’t taxpayers? They don’t deserve some protection, too? From greedy billionaires, for example?
- DuPage - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:35 pm:
@carhart 12:30 Rauner’s plan also takes wages off the table.
- Obamas Puppy - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:38 pm:
Rich- I can see you have taken hostage negotiations on as a hobby.
- Ghost - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:42 pm:
agreed. fyi teachers still bargain in chicago over wages and the lenght of the work day. they also bargain over overtime, training days, health insurance, vacation etc.
if that was the proposal for all unions, not much their to object to.
- Team Sleep - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 12:58 pm:
I hate typing this, but this is when someone in the Senate or House GOP Caucuses other than Leader Radogno or Leader Durkin needs to step up and introduce something. No more waiting for one of the Leaders to drop a massive bill. Someone in either leadership or even the rank-and-file needs to have staffers and Caucus attorneys hammer out legislation that reflects Chicago’s exemptions and Rich’s suggestions.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:05 pm:
Rauner took office on January 11, 2015. Today is February 23, 2016.
–So propose a freaking bill already and put the Democrats on the spot. Unless, of course, he doesn’t want a deal.–
I think the answer to that is clear by now.
What else makes sense?
- Henry - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:13 pm:
Simply applying the same collective bargaining exclusions that Chicago receives to the rest of the state probably wouldn’t be enough for the Governor. He could easily claim that different school districts have different challenges/priorities so ALL collective bargaining exclusions need to be on the table, which wouldn’t go anywhere. While I agree it would be nice to see the leaders agree on something, I doubt this would be it.
- There is power in a union... - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:18 pm:
“To me, anyway, that would be a big Rauner victory. He’s right that it’s the fair thing to do, and he’s right that the Democrats have already agreed to these ideas for the state’s largest city.”
No the fair thing to do would be to put these things BACK into collective bargaining…
- A Jack - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:18 pm:
Doesn’t 105 ILCS 5/ set the minimum school year and day length? So day length / year are outside of bargaining anyway?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:22 pm:
===No the fair thing to do would be to put these things BACK into collective bargaining===
LOL
You lost the governor’s race. Get used to it.
- There is power in a union... - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:26 pm:
Papa: I heard he took stopping automatic dues deduction off the table. Removing it is not in the final offer. I think Illinois would have become pretty much the only employer in the country to not automatically deduct full share dues. (If anyone knows otherwise please let me know.) Heck, we allow deductions for united way… Kinda hard to argue deducting dues is a burdensome cost.
1.) At the time he thought friedrichs would do his job for him. 2.) What he really wants is unfettered privatization.
- There is power in a union... - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:28 pm:
“You lost the governor’s race. Get used to it.”
I am.
The Republicans don’t have a majority in the general assembly. Get used to it.
- Expletivedeleted - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:31 pm:
@Papa2008- “Show me the flaw in this.” Well, since you asked. AFSCMEs “demands” are very close to a continuation of the existing contract which itself is nearly identical to the one which preceded. 8 years of precedent is a good jumping off point for good faith bargaining. Secondly, “voluntary” increases in payments to the union in the form of fair-share members electing to become full “dues-paying” members have increased since the election not vice versa. Recent history suggests your assumption that members are just waiting to not pay dues might be shall we say overly rosy. Furthermore, by eliminating the existing protections against contracting and almost completely eliminating bumping the Gov’s proposals would leave the union toothless in protecting members job security. That is how you destroy a union. Incidentally, it is also how you destroy the State workforce. The point that many miss when discussing public sector unions is that their members take low-paying entry level jobs and spend years and a ton of of man-hours developing the knowledge and experience the public demands in administering a huge number of government programs. Do you want the receptionist from your doctor’s office reviewing your disability claim? The kid from Liberty Tax reviewing Caterpillar’s corporate income tax filing? How much experience do you expect from the Infectious disease surveillance program at IDPH? Would a temp from Manpower be ok? The social worker who investigates reports of abuse? A new grad straight out of college is surely prepared to decide which families stay together and whose kids go into the foster care system, right? After all, the people doing it now are just milking the system right? How about the nurses who inspect your grandma’s nursing home? Which agency would you like to have the authority and incentive to lay off the older, more knowledgeable, more experienced people who actually do all of the things the voters demand of their government? /rant
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:33 pm:
- There is power in a union… -
Is your goal to get a deal or argue the 2014 gubernatorial race all over again?
Dems control the Legislature, Raunerites control the Executive.
Elections have consequences, Labor, and public sector Labor specifically, need to learn that. I’m sorry. Thems the breaks, March 15th is around the corner, but we need progress now.
- GOP Extremist - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:40 pm:
The governor doesn’t want the deal like Chicsgo has. He wants to give local school districts the tools necessary to cut wages for teachers, service personnel and construction workers employed on public projects. Chicago’s deal goes nowhere close to what he wants but it just happens to fit his narrative.
- Expletivedeleted - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:47 pm:
Sorry, rant distracted me from main point and my one phone-typing finger got tired. I do obviously believe that Rauner intends to destroy AFSCME. However, I do not believe that in and of itself weakening the union is his main goal. I believe that it is simply a means to an end. The endgame is maneuvering the Democrats into choosing between supporting unions which have traditionally backed them and those who rely most on government services. That’s why there can’t be a contract or a budget. Both have to in jeopardy in order to force that choice. It’s just politics played with actual lives instead of words.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:51 pm:
Did someone convince this governor that it is better to lose in courts or across Illinois than it is to lose on a bill vote in the GA?
Because that is where deals and laws are made and if he is too afraid to present his policies and proposals there, then none of his policies or proposals will happen.
Govern already!
- GOP Extremist - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 1:58 pm:
March 15th is the reason everyone is trying to look like thier working so hard but I think everyone knows nothing is going to be resolved anytime soon.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 2:15 pm:
==I’ve written this in the past and no one has taken the opportunity to refute: Rauner doesn’t want to destroy labor unions.==
Knock, knock. Hi, it’s me. Reality. Unless you are living under a rock you would know that Rauner’s entire labor agenda is a refute to your assertion.
I would also refer you to the post above on the Governor’s proposed “reforms.” Those “reforms” pretty well get rid of anything of substance to bargain for.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 2:17 pm:
Continuing on my thought . . .
Also see his thoughts on Right to Work, Fair Share dues and Prevailing Wage.
How much more do you need to refute your argument?
- Papa2008 - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 2:18 pm:
EX:
All your points taken. However, none of what you say seems to answer my question. If he wants to destroy AFSCME the quickest way is to cut off their money. Elimination of dues check off does that. Why doesn’t he propose it? My view: He doesn’t want to destroy AFSCME. If his real goal is to make the dems choose they have already done so. Look at the decimation of private social services. While it will certainly be argued both sides own that issue, your answer made it clear that was the direction Rauner is pushing the dems to decide. They seem to have done that.
- Jack Stephens - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 2:20 pm:
Bruce doesnt want to break unions, just teachers unions.
I say break up the Prison Unions. Seriously, how much does a bologna sandwich tosser have to make? They get paid better than teachers for christ sake. There are plenty of Big Box greeters at the store near the interstate, down the road from the prisons, who can make toss sandwiches and babysit pot smokers for less.
- Papa2008 - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 2:22 pm:
To all responders:
I understand you all believe he wants to destroy unions. And most of his actions support that. I see the dues check off elimination as the quickest way to do it. But he doesn’t. Why?
- Juice - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 2:28 pm:
A couple of problems with the Governor’s rhetoric. Yes, Chicago got length of school day and school year taken out of collective bargaining. But CPS also ended up having to give significant pay increases to do so. So yes, management has a greater ability to set the schedule, but they doesn’t mean they don’t then have to pay teachers more to do so.
And second, allowing CPS to outsource work was part of the 1995 reform, so you know, Daniels was Speaker, not Madigan. But it has stayed in all these years, so there’s that.
- Trolling Troll - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 2:30 pm:
Jack Stephens is to prison guards as Arizona Bob is to teacher unions.
- Carhartt Representative - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 2:36 pm:
=A couple of problems with the Governor’s rhetoric. Yes, Chicago got length of school day and school year taken out of collective bargaining. But CPS also ended up having to give significant pay increases to do so. So yes, management has a greater ability to set the schedule, but they doesn’t mean they don’t then have to pay teachers more to do so.=
Exactly, teachers can’t say if you want to make the school day longer than we’d like to be able to have less paperwork. Instead, everything has to have a price tag.
- Jack Stephens - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 3:29 pm:
@trolling:
Your right. Our Prisons are marvelous examples of use of public funds to improve society. All those (black) men come out of prison rehabilitated and become law abiding taxpayers. Thanks to the marvelous work of Union Prison Guards.
Teachers? What do they during the day? Change the channel on the TV in the classroom. Thats about it. Dont they serve snacks to the rug rats too?
How is that?
- Honeybear - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 4:36 pm:
papa2008, one it’s in the current contract so he has to abide by it or face an unfair labor practice judgment which he doesn’t want to do right now. 2) People are jacked up right now and know that paying our dues protects us. 3) when he attacked fairshare our actual fairshares joined the union to get protection from him.
- Honeybear - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 4:49 pm:
Okay, so I’m back in agreement with Power in the Union. Why does Labor have to give anything? So what if that’s a “give” or “compromise”. We aren’t in the legislature. We didn’t get our state in this bind. They robbed our pensions, didn’t make the payments, then blamed US for it. They starve our agencies, drive away our coworker, threaten our benefits, then start to work on us. I’m not talking about just Rauner here. Quinn, Blago, Madigan, they all took whacks at us. So up yours really if you think we’re going to compromise on anything. We’re in full on fighting mode now and we are finally waking up to reality here. I’m upset with myself for faltering on other posts. I’ve had a snickers now and I’m going back in.
- The_Equalizer - Tuesday, Feb 23, 16 @ 4:55 pm:
1. He doesn’t want a deal, he wants capitulation.
2. He wants the same thing for the rest of the state as Chicago has…but only in this case. Otherwise he believes in local control. Basically, whichever gets what he wants. Just like many of his type, he believes in less government…until he believes in more government. Just depends on the topic at hand.