LANSING – Once the decision was made to address the issue, both chambers of the Legislature deliberately, and relatively quickly on Thursday, passed first-House bills to end mandatory participation in union shops in Michigan.
The action came after Governor Rick Snyder announced his support for right-to-work laws, and during a day of ongoing protests.
Though legislative leadership had been hedging on the mechanism for enacting right-to-work bills for the past couple of weeks, it was obvious that decisions for vehicle bills had been made for some time as both chambers were ready with substitutes within hours of announcing the issue was moving.
As vehicle bills, they could be sent to Snyder for signature as early as Tuesday, when the Legislature returns to session.
The bills as passed would prohibit unions from requiring membership or any fees to work in a given job and would make it a crime to force or coerce anyone to join a union. Employers would face the same penalties for forcing employees out of unions.
The bills also include $1 million for the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs to help the Employment Relations Commission implement the law – and to prevent opponents from subjecting the bill to referendum.
The exemption from right-to-work provisions would be for police and firefighters, and was made to recognize the dangerous nature of their work and constitutional provision affecting the State Police.
The Senate had bills to address both public and private employers, bills that, in the end will likely be the vehicles given action in the House. Private sector employees would not have to join the union in their workplace under legislation passed Thursday by the House.
The Senate also saw farther-ranging discussions on its bills, while the House essentially jammed through its bill, but got stopped up at the end with a motion to reconsider.
The Senate battle over taking up – or at least largely delaying – right-to-work legislation saw leaders in both the majority and minority parties used every parliamentary procedure possible to hinder the other.
After concurring in House versions of Blue Cross Blue Shield legislation and passing legislation barring abortion coverage in policies offered through the Affordable Care Act (see separate stories), Senate Majority Floor Leader Arlan Meekhof (R-West Olive) moved to adopt an S-8 substitute for HB 4003 , expected to be the vehicle bill for public unions. He then moved to discharge SB 116 from the Senate Economic Development Committee and adopt an S-3 substitute for that bill – and the right-to-work fight began.
SB 116, which saw 20 failed amendments from Democrats, passed 22-16, with Republican opposition from Sen. Mike Nofs of Battle Creek, Sen. Tom Casperson of Escanaba, Sen. Tory Rocca of Sterling Heights and Sen. Mike Green of Mayville.
Senate Minority Leader Gretchen Whitmer (D-East Lansing) proposed such amendments as not allowing the bill to take effect until January 1, 2014; repealing the item-pricing law; creating a report on the wages and unemployment in the state post-legislation; requiring unemployment to drop by 1 percent for four years or the act would repeal and re-naming the legislation the Randy Richardville Right-To-Work Act after the Senate majority leader.
“Your action today to take up the single most divisive piece of legislation flies directly in the face of what Michigan truly needs to get our economic recovery back on track,” Whitmer said. “It shows that you either cannot or worse choose not to listen. This isn’t a flip-flop, it’s a face plant. It’s vindictive political retribution not relentless positive action.”
Sen. Coleman Young II (D-Detroit) rose in support of one of Whitmer’s amendments that called for annual reports on the wages of Michigan citizens, as well as the rate of unemployment post-right-to-work.
“If you believe right-to-work is going to increase wages, you might as well believe in beanstalks. You might as well believe in big foot. You might as well believe in the abominable snowman,” he said.
Sen. John Gleason (D-Flushing) offered an amendment to end “freeloading by those that secure all the benefits of unions” without actually being in them. That saw nearly as much support as a proposed amendment by Sen. Steve Bieda (D-Warren) to repeal the pension tax. Gleason’s amendment was defeated 17-21 while Bieda’s was defeated 18-20.
Sen. Tory Rocca (R-Sterling Heights), Sen. Mike Nofs (R-Battle Creek) and Sen. Tom Casperson (R-Escanaba) frequently joined Democrats in supporting some of the proposed amendments, but it was never enough for one to be included in SB 116.
Once through the proposed amendments, Meekhof said of his bill, it would “bring workplace fairness and equality to the hard-working families of Michigan …It will give each and every worker the freedom to choose to be in a union or not.”
Meekhof’s speech drew shouts from the gallery crowded with protestors and people had to be escorted out.
In giving their no-vote explanations on SB 116, Senate Democrats continued to reference studies they say show right-to-work states comprising almost half of the top 15 states for unemployment and those with the lowest per capita income nationally.
Sen. Bert Johnson (D-Highland Park) and others referenced the history of unions and what they’ve been able to attain for the greater public, saying passing this legislation would send the state back to “the dark ages.”
Johnson’s no vote explanation was the longest, lasting at least an hour, as he read from the Wikipedia entry of Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters. He then spoke about multiple studies comparing right-to-work states and those without.
Whitmer told the story of her grandmother, a school teacher who attributed many of her freedoms regarding voting, having protection on maternity leave and so on to being in the teacher’s union.
“This (legislation) isn’t about unions and labor. This is about the people of our state and do you want to make them second-class citizens,” she said. “Let’s be clear, this legislation is petty and vindictive politics at its ugliest. This legislation would only succeed in taking money out of the pockets of the middle-class.”
Sen. Hoon-Yung Hopgood (D-Taylor) spoke of how the legislation ignored the democratic process in the worst way, and said the whole matter has changed his opinion of Snyder. He said when people would ask him his thoughts on the governor, he would say, “Let’s see. Let’s see if he changes Lansing or if Lansing changes him.” The answer, he said, was more evident than ever after the way right-to-work was rushed so quickly and brought up so abruptly.
After an extensively long ordeal in trying to pass SB 116, Meekhof moved that HB 4003 – the vehicle bill for right-to-work as it pertains to public workers – be considered read. He then moved to consider amendments 1 through 20 (presumably all from Democrats) en banc, stifling any chance at debating the bill much longer.
It was on that motion that Senate Democrats left their seats and stood in their respective caucus room in protest. As the bill moved to final passage, Casperson, Nofs, Green and Rocca again voted against the legislation, the final tally being 22-4. As soon as the House concurs in the bill, it will be on its way to Snyder’s desk.
Just before the Senate session adjourned, Sen. Patrick Colbeck (R-Canton), a long-time supporter of right-to-work legislation, took to the Senate floor podium to express his content over finally passing legislation, alleging that statistics related to the loss of population – and in particular of young people – was due to jobs, and that by an almost 3-to-1 margin, that population preferred moving to states with right-to-work laws.
He said that if unions are still so important and their members believe in its cause, it they and other opponents should not worry that membership will decline.
“This legislation does not end collective bargaining,” he said. “Quite simply, it’s about freedom: Freedom to join a union or not join a union.”
Sen. Glenn Anderson (D-Westland) responded to the speech saying that he was not surprised to hear such support from someone who was predominately voted into office by members of the Tea Party, and that statistics in fact told the opposite story Colbeck tried to tell.
On the north end of the Capitol in the House discussion on HB 4054 H-10, a twin to SB 116, started later than the Senate, ended earlier and was pointed as expected for the issue, but was made more rancorous after State Police closed the Capitol over concerns the building could not handle the volume of people trying to enter.
Republicans lined the bill up for its new purpose by discharging it from the House Commerce Committee. A floor substitute expanded it to prohibit required union membership, which was quickly moved to third reading where amendments offered by Democrats could be blocked (four were offered but the speaker found insufficient support for all).
Republicans were not able to keep their caucus together on the bill, with Rep. Anthony Forlini (R-Harrison Township), Rep. Ken Goike (R-Ray Township), Rep. Ken Horn (R-Frankenmuth), Rep. Ed McBroom (R-Vulcan), Rep. Patrick Somerville (R-New Boston) and Rep. Dale Zorn (R-Ida) joined a united Democratic caucus to oppose the bill, giving the bill a 58-52 final vote.
Supporters said the bill would mean more freedom for workers.
“This law will be a game changer for Michigan,” House Speaker Jase Bolger (R-Marshall) said after session. “It will be a game changer for Michigan workers and a game changer for Michigan kids.”
And he said the opposition had gone too far in its statements. “What has frankly offended me is Democrats calling Michigan workers freeloaders,” he said. They work hard and deserve the choice to join a union, he said.
The bill “affirms and further protects the rights afforded by our Constitution,” said Rep. Mike Shirkey (R-Clarklake), who sponsored the substitute. “It’s not about attacking the unions but rather about protecting individual rights.”
Shirkey argued that right-to-work had been a boon for states that had adopted it. “Freedom to work states over the last decade have enjoyed more private sector job growth, have enjoyed more population growth,” he said. “They are the only states in the last decade that have enjoyed union membership growth.”
Rep. Greg MacMaster (R-Kewadin) said the change would force unions to sell themselves to employees. “Now the unions have a perfect opportunity to step up to the line and provide a better service,” he said.
Democrats, following statements from union officials over the past several days, said the law would essentially allow people to use the union’s services without having to pay for them.
“With this bill, we’re allowing people to benefit from the hard work that others have to do is the very epitome of free loading,” said Rep. Brandon Dillon (D-Grand Rapids).
But Democrats also protested moving the bill from the floor rather than starting it in committee, particularly since the bill includes an appropriation to head off a referendum.
“Why can’t you take this to the voters? Because you know what happens,” Dillon said. “Why do it in lame duck? Because you know next session you won’t have the votes.”
Rep. Woodrow Stanley (D-Flint) called the measure a “political cliff” and said movement on the bill would have consequences for the rest of the session and potentially into next session.
“What goes over the cliff is any thought of bipartisanship,” he said. “What goes over the cliff is any thought of trust.”
Democrats broke a call of the House and left the chamber to protest the building remaining closed despite an Ingham Circuit Court order that it be reopened. House Minority Floor Leader Kate Segal (D-Battle Creek) had moved for the chamber recess until the building reopened, but the speaker ruled the court order did not pertain to the House’s actions.
Rep. Vicki Barnett (D-Farmington Hills) and Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Detroit) were briefly locked outside as they left to help usher people into the building and then were not allowed to re-enter until caucus staff identified them to troopers guarding the doors.
“They wouldn’t be reopening it if we hadn’t gone out to order it reopened,” Barnett said. “Had we not gone out there to enforce compliance with the injunction, it would still not be enforced.”
But they did all return to vote on the measure.
Once it gets there, the bill will still have to wait five days in the Senate, but the measure is still in the House because Ms. Segal moved to reconsider the vote. That motion is still pending in the House. Bolger said it would be taken up on Tuesday if needed, but indicated the Senate package would likely be sufficient to enact the change.
Though dealing with different employee types, all of the bills are essentially identical in their content. They would make it illegal for a worker to be required to join a union, or to be required to resign from a union, to take or continue in a job. Unions also could not require workers, presumably non-members, to pay dues or fees to the union or to any other organization on the union’s behalf.
The bills would leave existing contracts requiring membership or agency fees to remain in place until they expire. The public sector bill also specifically states public school employers collecting dues pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement that is in effect on March 16, 2012 are not prohibited until the agreement expires or is terminated, extended or renewed.
As Republican leadership had previously alluded to in a press conference Thursday afternoon (see related story), police and fire personnel, including a State Police trooper or sergeant, would not be covered by the legislation because their bargaining rights are outlined in the state Constitution.
Challenges to a contract alleged to require or prohibit union membership or fees would go to the Court of Appeals, which would be required to expedite the cases. Employers or unions violating the law could be liable for civil fines of up to $500 as well as damages to any employees challenging the action.
Unions and employers also would not be permitted, outside the language of the contract, to use “force, intimidation, or unlawful threats” to compel employees to join or quit a union. Those actions would face the same $500 civil fine.
The appropriation in the bills would allow LARA to respond to questions and inform employers and employees about the act, provide the Employment Relations Commission with staff to implement the act, and “any other purposes that the director of the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs determines in his or her discretion are necessary to implement the amendatory act.?
This story was provided by Gongwer News Service. To subscribe, click on Gongwer.Com
