State senators approved legislation Thursday some charge is designed to weaken public employee unions.
SB 1484 scraps current law which allows state or local workers or teachers to have to sign up only once to have union dues deducted from their paychecks. Instead, the measure requires those employees to sign up annually for such deductions.
Several other measures crafted by the Goldwater Institute, which has been engaged in perennial fights with public employee unions, still await action. That includes a broad proposal to preclude collective state and local governments and school districts from engaging in any form of collective bargaining with employee groups.
The 19-11 vote occurred with two Republicans, Rich Crandall and Jerry Lewis, both of Mesa, siding with Democrats against the measure. The bill now goes to the House.
Central to the battle - and the dues question in particular - is the power of unions.
Sen. Frank Antenori, R-Tucson, said there is a cost to the government to operate a system that allows deductions, a cost borne by the government and, by extension, the taxpayers.
He said there is nothing inherently wrong with automatic deductions. What is wrong, Antenori said, is using those public resources to help unions with their efforts to lobby the Legislature, often in ways he believes are contrary to what other taxpayers might want.
"If you have people that are able to bring large amounts of money and large organizations to bear to influence elected officials or bodies for their benefit at the expense of others, I think we have to seriously consider this,'' he said. "All this does is level the playing field.''
Sen. Andy Biggs, R-Gilbert, pointed out that the legislation still allows employees to have their union dues deducted from their paychecks. The only difference, he said, is they have to make a conscious choice each year.
"This bill is kind of like renewing a magazine subscription,'' he said, with those whose money is being taken forced to decide each year if the investment is worth it. And he denied that the legislation is designed to deter anyone from keeping up his or her union membership.
But Sen. David Lujan, D-Phoenix, said any arguments that this change is fairer to taxpayers is undermined by a report from legislative budget staffers.
They cited comments by the city of Phoenix that having to process annual renewals for union dues from all of its workers, rather than make changes only when specifically requested, would result in a one-time expense of $300,000, with an ongoing annual cost of $85,000.
Sen. Sylvia Allen, R-Snowflake, said there's an answer to that: Eliminate the right of unions to get payroll deductions in the first place. In fact, such a measure was approved by a Senate committee but was never brought to the full Senate.
She said the state is being "very generous'' in allowing any deductions at all for union dues.
deportthemall posted at 1:49 pm on Fri, Feb 17, 2012.
[beam]@ master.. no surprise here over the past years i have been in several unions and never thought they were a (#@p, i hope you finally were paid your money.
Mike McClellan posted at 9:10 am on Fri, Feb 17, 2012.
The smokescreen the Republitarians in the legislature use to hide the intent of this bill -- to discourage public employees from joining a union -- is laughable.
Andy Biggs says it's like "renewing a subscription," but if Phoenix is typical of that "renewal," then these allegedly cost-conscious Republitarians are going to cost us taxpayers more money each year thanks to this scheme.
I belonged to the teacher's union in Arizona off and on for 30 years. I left it twice, in protest, and only had to make a phone call and sign a paper to leave.
This is just another example of the Far Right's attempt to weaken the public employee sector, taking advantage of the perception that public employees are doing better than the private sector in a time of economic hardship.
As the recent Phoenix study of public employees vs. private employees showed, that's not necessarily the case. And as a former public employee, I know my experience over the last 7 years of my career was this: From 2004 to 2011, my salary was frozen and my benefits costs rose, which meant I took home less money during those years.
Masterrogue666 posted at 7:43 pm on Thu, Feb 16, 2012.
I've had the dissatisfaction of being in a Union once. I noticed early on that they worked hard to keep what I considered low caliber workers employeed. I found it odd that these low caliber workers were always getting in trouble because they couldn't do the their job like high caliber workers could.
One time, I was told at the end of my shift to come in at an earlier time tomorrow. Bylaws stated that I was suppose to receive 24 hours notice (I'd got less than 12 hours) of a schedule change. If not, then I was to receive 1 1/2 time pay.
When my paycheck came, I noticed managements error. I advised my supervisor. He said I need to inform the Union. I did. I was required to fill out some paper work in order to file a grievance with a Union Steward. Lucky me, they assigned it to a new steward so she could get some experience.
I waited for my next paycheck. I had heard nothing from the Union, so thought the problem was resolved. Surpise, surprise, I didn't get the bonus which was my right to get. I found out that the steward had lost the paperwork. I went to the Union a second time. Refiled the grievance, and was told they'd give it to an experience steward this time. During the next two weeks, I'd send an occasional email to the "experienced" steward asking for an update. I got nothing back. So, I wasn't surprised when my next paycheck again did not show the bonus pay.
By this time, I was quite tired of dealing with just stewards. I went directly to the Vice President of the Union (whom I happened to know just because I met him). He apologized and said he'd take care of it personally. Next paycheck same thing.
During lunch, while complaining to a friend about the union's inability to handle something so cut and dry, another steward approached me. This one seemed to know what he was talking about. He also said that since the first steward lost the paperwork, the and nothing else was done with the other two filed grievances (including informing me of the outcome of the grievance), than a breach of contact occurred, and the Union could be held accountable. He said that I could actually sue the Union, and win. I thought about it. However, I figured if I did sue, than I would only be taking away money from co-workers that may need it in the future.
I decided to quit the Union. However, I found out that you had to jump through hoops to do that. You could only leave once you filed the proper paperwork. However, you were only allowed to file that paperwork during a very specific two week period, which had passed about a month prior to my finding out.
When I finally was able to leave the Union, the Vice President came to me and asked why I left. I told him to file a grievance, then give it to me, and maybe I'll get back to him.....