Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

President Harmon on staff union legislation: House leadership and staff should “get together and solve their own problems” (Updated)

Posted in:

Illinois
Updated Posts

* As we discussed, House Speaker Chris Welch was asked yesterday how the Illinois Legislative Staff Association’s lawsuit affects his message on workers’ rights. A reporter asked Senate President Don Harmon this morning why his chamber hasn’t moved a bill that would allow staff to unionize…

Reporter: Could you weigh in, there’s so much talk about labor. We asked Speaker Welch yesterday, does Illinois need to remove its contingents in law that are hindering the ability for General Assembly employees to unionize. There’s so much talk about labor, why not them?

President Harmon: The one thing that’s become crystal clear from this litigation is that the bill the House passed does not accomplish the objectives of either side. I hope that the House leadership and staff will get together and solve their own problems.

[garbled follow up question]

Harmon: Again, I think the bill, as it passed, the House was a nonstarter. I think the staff would agree with that, and did so in their pleadings. I’m hoping the House will get together internally and come up with those solutions.

I think everybody understands, including the staff, that there are fatal flaws in the bill. And again, I hope that the House leadership and staff will get together and work out their own problems.

Thoughts?

[Full video is here.]

…Adding… ILSA’s response…

Response from @ILSA217 #twill https://t.co/F1Z9krXDYE pic.twitter.com/X03gWRVCRb

— Ben Szalinski (@BenSzalinski) August 20, 2024

posted by Isabel Miller
Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 10:22 am

Comments

Watching hypocrisy being made is so much fun.

Comment by DougChicago Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 10:35 am
Sounds like President Harmon didn’t appreciate Welch trying to shift blame to the Senate. I would like to hear him clearly articulate a position on whether legislative staff currently has the right to form a union, and what legislation if any would be necessary to effectuate that. I understand he’d prefer to let Welch answer those questions but if he’s going to brick the legislation citing “fatal flaws” then it would be helpful for everyone to know what specifically he thinks those flaws are.

Comment by charles in charge Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 10:35 am
Harmon is on a power trip. I’m surprised he can fit his head through the doorway.

Comment by Dupage Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 10:44 am
The Senate was always the more deliberate chamber. (Spoken as a biased former Senate staffer)

Seriously, I’ve always felt that a union was a bad idea for legislative and campaign staffs.

Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 10:48 am
Charles In Charge, the House staff identified the flaws …

In its lawsuit Friday, however, the association derided the bill itself, complaining it contained a “poison pill” in that it would force ILSA members to collectively bargain with Republican staff in the House. The association pointed out that GOP staffers are hired by a different employer and accused Welch of inserting that language “so as to make it potentially impossible for the Speaker to claim authority to conduct bargaining.”

https://pantagraph.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/members-of-illinois-house-speaker-s-staff-sue-over-ongoing-unionization-conflict/article_c9c425b8-2037-11ef-a65a-ff7f35881329.html

Comment by For the Record Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 10:58 am
@Norseman - Why is a union a bad idea for legislative staffs?

Comment by Chicagonk Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 10:59 am
==Charles In Charge, the House staff identified the flaws …==

Thank you. I understand that’s the union’s position, and while Harmon’s statement *could* be read to mean that he is in full agreement with that position, I don’t necessarily read it that way. He says he agrees, and “everyone understands” including the House staff, that “there are fatal flaws” with the bill; however, it is unclear whether the “flaws” he sees with the bill are the same as those identified by the staff in their pleadings, or if he sees different or additional concerns. My understanding is that the staff has demanded that the Speaker voluntarily recognize the union, and Welch is claiming he cannot legally do so without the passage of legislation. Is Harmon’s position that the House *could* voluntarily recognize the union without the need for legislation, or does he believe that legislation is necessary but the bill passed by the House is flawed? I don’t believe I’ve ever heard Harmon speak directly to those questions, but if he has, please enlighten me.

Comment by charles in charge Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 11:53 am
Harmon and Welch should have just been honest and stated that they don’t think their respective staffs should be allowed to unionize and provide the rationale for that position. It would have reflected better on them than their current course of action (or inaction).

Comment by Barrister's Lectern Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 12:04 pm
=== The association pointed out that GOP staffers are hired by a different employer ===

LOL. MAGA GOP staff essentially perform the same function. Any normal union would insist that it should represent all like employees. The staff union folks understand that the MAGA GOP would rightly (one of the few times I’d say that) oppose unionizing.

Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 12:17 pm
Hard to believe this is still an issue. Legislative staff should be at will employees.

Comment by Former Farmer Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 12:43 pm
=== Any normal union would insist that it should represent all like employees.===

GOP should be given the right to unionize, but it would be inappropriate for GOP staff to be in the same bargaining unit as Dem staff. Since they are hired by separate entities, separate bargaining units can and should be set up.

Comment by Bargainingforunion Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 12:43 pm
==Hard to believe this is still an issue. Legislative staff should be at will employees.==

I don’t agree with you, but more to the point, this isn’t the public position that either the Speaker or the Senate President have taken. It *is* a much clearer and more defensible position than the gobbledygook we’ve heard from them so far on this topic.

Comment by charles in charge Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 1:10 pm
==ILSA maintains that no bill is needed==

These are legislative staff people? Who thinks the constitutional provision is self actualizing?

If their sole goal is to embarrass the speaker, then they don’t need a bill or a law to do that; the constitutional provision is enough. But if they want to actually get a union recognized, then they’ll need to codify a process.

Who’s being in serious now?

Comment by Socially DIstant watcher Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 1:16 pm
Chicagonk, here you go. Legislative staffs are political positions. There has always been a recognition that political/policy making positions have been at will. Their purpose is to serve the politicians who have been elected on a partisan basis. If they don’t perform that function well, it could be a detriment to their bosses. (Yes, the MAGA GOP stands out as a group that doesn’t perform well and can be a detriment to staff security.)

You also have to consider the nature of the working conditions. The G.A. works during certain months of the year at various levels of intensity. Making politicians take oft-needed unpopular votes requires a high intensity work period towards deadlines that makes them more amenable to make those votes. Staff has to be there at all times during that process. I remember having to work almost 24 hours on the last bill that needed to pass to adjourn one legislative session. This isn’t conducive to having labor negotiated work hours. Using the proverbial sausage making analogy, it isn’t pretty or desirable - it’s just what happens in the politically charged arena. You may think something can be worked out, but you still have the threat of a union precipitated strike or group sick days that could further delay getting the people’s business done.

Staff is made aware of these work conditions when hired. Most use the position as a stepping stone to other positions - as I and almost all my fellow staffers did at the time.

As for the hypocrisy comments. I too am getting a kick out of politicians hoisted on their own petard. But that doesn’t mean I’m ok with implementing a bad idea.

Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 3:51 pm
- Their purpose is to serve the politicians who have been elected on a partisan basis. If they don’t perform that function well, it could be a detriment to their bosses. -

As has been repeated many times, many Democratic campaign staffers have unionized, including the staff of former candidate Biden. I am not sure about Harris’ staff.

Union doesn’t equal employees can do whatever they want, it means rules have to be negotiated. That can include partisanship, and it certainly includes performance.

Comment by Excitable Boy Tuesday, Aug 20, 24 @ 6:13 pm
===Hard to believe this is still an issue’===

At will employees still have protections from termination for unlawful reasons. There are many at will employees in state government. Agency director’s executive assistants, general counsels, assistant directors, HR heads, etc. These people are direct reports to Governor or Agency Head. Legislative staff report directly to a legislative leader while formulating strategy and policy. If any government jobs is at will it is legislative staff.

Comment by Henry Wednesday, Aug 21, 24 @ 10:58 am