Where firefighters come to talk training
A Nation of Unionized Volunteers?
“The Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act” would mandate union monopoly bargaining for state and local public safety employees. (See: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-413 and http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s111-1611)
It would force police, fire, ambulance and corrections employees to create collective bargaining units to cover employees and likely produce higher taxes, higher deficits and higher tensions between public sector employees and the public they serve.
I am immediately cynical of this legislation, because it would appear as though the sponsors are attempting to go through the back door, under a cloak of secrecy and attach it to a spending bill as if it were some kind of parasite, which, it is.
This monstrosity is contained in the “Amendment to the Senate Engrossed Amendment to the Text of HR 4899 – Supplemental War Appropriations Bill”. (See: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-4899 )
The Public Safety Collective Bargaining provisions are buried on page 88, Chapter 4, “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act”.
It says:
Public Safety Collective Bargaining: The House amendment guarantees collective bargaining rights for the nation’s first responders employed by States and localities. Under the language, states would administer and enforce their own labor laws, while the Federal Labor Relations Authority would step in only where such laws do not exist or do not meet minimum standards. The language prohibits public safety officers from engaging in a lockout, sickout, work slowdown, strike, or any other organized job action that will disrupt the delivery of emergency services.
In short; we-public safety employees-would no longer have the right to choose union representation or not.
Gone will be “right to work” as we know it.
Right to work laws prohibit the closed and union shop. A right to work law secures the right of the individual to decide whether they want to join and support a union. There are exceptions, such as rail and airline employees.
With open shop rule, an employee cannot be forced to join or pay the equivalent of union dues, nor can they be fired if they join a union. It is the employees’ right to work, regardless of whether they are in a union.
Yes; this means volunteers! Volunteers are “employees”. Therefore; this means you and any career folks who aren’t currently covered under a collective bargaining agreement.
But, how could this God forsaken bill be this close to reality and yet; many in the fire service are completely unaware of its existence? Legislation that could become so expensive as to bankrupt a fire district deserves some serious attention. I am all for transparency but not invisibility. I want our government to deal with the People’s business in the open, during the daylight hours and reject the idea that legislation that stinks will somehow smell better if it is “bundled” correctly.
This bill this time around, since versions of this bill have been around since 2001, was introduced by Michigan Congressman Dale Kildee and New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg. It would appear that the late night meeting with Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and the biggest unions just after November 2nd was an attempt to “thank” the unions for the $53 million that they pumped into the elections this year. You know; no strings attached.
Knowing that a bill unionizing the entire public safety sector wouldn’t even make it out of committee by conventional means, they had to resort to trickery/chicanery in order to get it so close to becoming law.
When I read what was attached to this spending bill for our men and women in the armed services, it made my stomach wretch. THAT is how you move garbage in Washington. You want to get something through government that could never make it out otherwise, then burying it as an amendment towards the end of the bill could almost guarantee passage; if it wasn’t such an old trick.
To be clear…
I am NOT against unions. I was in a union. I have friends in unions. I have been on both sides of the fence. I can take them or leave them.
I AM against anything that takes away my right to choose whether or not I want a union to represent me.
I am against the influence peddling by powerful union lobbies.
I am against unions using membership money for elections and especially from those industries that were bailed out by the American taxpayer.
I am against the scare tactics employed by the unions and though public employees do not have the right to strike, there have been strikes in the past. And just the thought of not having someone to respond if you have an emergency is a very powerful tool.
In my opinion, the reason that there has been a push to unionize the public sector is because the numbers have been shrinking in the private sector. For the first time in our nation’s history, there are more public sector union employees than private sector union employees.
I am not sure what the end game will be, but consider this:
What is the likelihood that a village of one thousand residents will be able to afford this partnership between their fire department and a collective bargaining representative?
If it has already proven to be unsustainable in other communities, then why would we want to expand it?
To summarize, the legislation that is being proposed will:
1) Force YOU to join a union.
2) Overturn the right to work in 26 states.
3) Increase costs with no guarantee of better service.
4) There will be no more flexibility. Everything will be legislated and contained in a contract.
5) Volunteer departments as we know them will cease to be.
Contact your representatives and FIGHT this!
It’s something that, quite literally, we cannot afford.
The opinions and views expressed are those of the article’s author. They do not reflect the opinions and views of fireengineering.com, Fire Engineering Magazine or PennWell Corporation.
Links to Sources:
http://appropriations.house.gov/images/stories/pdf/War_Supplemental...
http://nlpc.org/stories/2010/05/18/union-backed-bill-would-force-mo...
http://www.nrtwc.org/FactSheets/PSMBFactSheet.pdf
http://www.aier.org/research/briefs/1550-obama-thanks-his-friends-g...
http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/86359-firefighter-and-police...
http://www.nilrr.org/
http://www.americansforprosperity.org/090310-police-and-fire-union-...
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_...
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_...
It would force police, fire, ambulance and corrections employees to create collective bargaining units to cover employees and likely produce higher taxes, higher deficits and higher tensions between public sector employees and the public they serve.
I am immediately cynical of this legislation, because it would appear as though the sponsors are attempting to go through the back door, under a cloak of secrecy and attach it to a spending bill as if it were some kind of parasite, which, it is.
This monstrosity is contained in the “Amendment to the Senate Engrossed Amendment to the Text of HR 4899 – Supplemental War Appropriations Bill”. (See: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-4899 )
The Public Safety Collective Bargaining provisions are buried on page 88, Chapter 4, “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act”.
It says:
Public Safety Collective Bargaining: The House amendment guarantees collective bargaining rights for the nation’s first responders employed by States and localities. Under the language, states would administer and enforce their own labor laws, while the Federal Labor Relations Authority would step in only where such laws do not exist or do not meet minimum standards. The language prohibits public safety officers from engaging in a lockout, sickout, work slowdown, strike, or any other organized job action that will disrupt the delivery of emergency services.
In short; we-public safety employees-would no longer have the right to choose union representation or not.
Gone will be “right to work” as we know it.
Right to work laws prohibit the closed and union shop. A right to work law secures the right of the individual to decide whether they want to join and support a union. There are exceptions, such as rail and airline employees.
With open shop rule, an employee cannot be forced to join or pay the equivalent of union dues, nor can they be fired if they join a union. It is the employees’ right to work, regardless of whether they are in a union.
Yes; this means volunteers! Volunteers are “employees”. Therefore; this means you and any career folks who aren’t currently covered under a collective bargaining agreement.
But, how could this God forsaken bill be this close to reality and yet; many in the fire service are completely unaware of its existence? Legislation that could become so expensive as to bankrupt a fire district deserves some serious attention. I am all for transparency but not invisibility. I want our government to deal with the People’s business in the open, during the daylight hours and reject the idea that legislation that stinks will somehow smell better if it is “bundled” correctly.
This bill this time around, since versions of this bill have been around since 2001, was introduced by Michigan Congressman Dale Kildee and New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg. It would appear that the late night meeting with Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and the biggest unions just after November 2nd was an attempt to “thank” the unions for the $53 million that they pumped into the elections this year. You know; no strings attached.
Knowing that a bill unionizing the entire public safety sector wouldn’t even make it out of committee by conventional means, they had to resort to trickery/chicanery in order to get it so close to becoming law.
When I read what was attached to this spending bill for our men and women in the armed services, it made my stomach wretch. THAT is how you move garbage in Washington. You want to get something through government that could never make it out otherwise, then burying it as an amendment towards the end of the bill could almost guarantee passage; if it wasn’t such an old trick.
To be clear…
I am NOT against unions. I was in a union. I have friends in unions. I have been on both sides of the fence. I can take them or leave them.
I AM against anything that takes away my right to choose whether or not I want a union to represent me.
I am against the influence peddling by powerful union lobbies.
I am against unions using membership money for elections and especially from those industries that were bailed out by the American taxpayer.
I am against the scare tactics employed by the unions and though public employees do not have the right to strike, there have been strikes in the past. And just the thought of not having someone to respond if you have an emergency is a very powerful tool.
In my opinion, the reason that there has been a push to unionize the public sector is because the numbers have been shrinking in the private sector. For the first time in our nation’s history, there are more public sector union employees than private sector union employees.
I am not sure what the end game will be, but consider this:
What is the likelihood that a village of one thousand residents will be able to afford this partnership between their fire department and a collective bargaining representative?
If it has already proven to be unsustainable in other communities, then why would we want to expand it?
To summarize, the legislation that is being proposed will:
1) Force YOU to join a union.
2) Overturn the right to work in 26 states.
3) Increase costs with no guarantee of better service.
4) There will be no more flexibility. Everything will be legislated and contained in a contract.
5) Volunteer departments as we know them will cease to be.
Contact your representatives and FIGHT this!
It’s something that, quite literally, we cannot afford.
The opinions and views expressed are those of the article’s author. They do not reflect the opinions and views of fireengineering.com, Fire Engineering Magazine or PennWell Corporation.
Links to Sources:
http://appropriations.house.gov/images/stories/pdf/War_Supplemental...
http://nlpc.org/stories/2010/05/18/union-backed-bill-would-force-mo...
http://www.nrtwc.org/FactSheets/PSMBFactSheet.pdf
http://www.aier.org/research/briefs/1550-obama-thanks-his-friends-g...
http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/86359-firefighter-and-police...
http://www.nilrr.org/
http://www.americansforprosperity.org/090310-police-and-fire-union-...
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_...
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_...
Views: 385
Comment
-
Comment by Art "Chief Reason" Goodrich on November 19, 2010 at 5:53pm
-
Yes; there may very well have been some confusion and misinterpretation of this bill on my part, but just like the National Healthcare bill, I can't help but feel that we will not know the true extent of the "Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act" for some time.
At least we got to read the bill, even though it was buried in a bill unrelated to public safety.
It is my hope that this practice by our elected officials of attaching this type of bill to completely unrelated legislation will stop, so that a bill can pass based upon its own merits.
Party affiliation should have no bearing on the contents of the legislation.
If it is not done in this fashion, then we will continue to see legislation that becomes law by default.
And that is just plain wrong.
I, too want to trumpet what Bobby said.
This is a great community.
-
-
I received this today from a friend:
Art, I just talked to the 7th District (Washington, Idaho, Montana and Alaska) V-P for the IAFF. He said the language that describes employees excludes volunteers from the equation, that is the IAFF's official position on the issue. His statement is the official IAFF stand, "the intent of the bill is to obtain the ability to sit at the table and discuss the wages, hours and conditions of work for the fire departments (fully paid FF's) that do not have that right at the present time". He said with the victory of the Republican write in candidate over the TEA Party candidate in Alaska the bill should be able to pass this year. Congresswoman Murkowski's victory was aided by the Alaska FF State organization and all the local unions in Alaska, she is a supporter of FF issues. There are enough Republican congress members that support this effort and support firefighters that combined with the Democrats it should pass the house, it has already passed the Senate and President Obama has said he will sign it. That is my update.
Sounds like a done deal.
Stay tuned.
-
-
Brian:
Thank you for your very thoughtful reply.
When I post something, this is the kind of effort that I like to see that brings quality to the discussion.
You did that.
My politics are simple: I am a Reagan Republican. I did not attend any Tea Party gatherings.
In the last election, I voted for ONE Democrat for sheriff, because of his conservative values.
I thought that I was clear on the message, which I thought was: don't take away our right to choose.
Great reply except for that Tea Party thing!
-
-
Here; maybe this will help you to understand my logic.
The NTSB came out as wanting to REQUIRE motorcyclists to wear helmets in all 50 states.
When my lovely wife and I hit the open road on my hog, we wear helmets. Illinois is a state that doesn't require them.
I am opposed to any law requiring them, because I believe that it should be the right of the riders to CHOOSE whether or not to wear them. A helmet is NOT a motorcycle's "seat belt". Motorcyclists have been fatally injured when not wearing them AND when wearing them. Many fatal accidents have occurred when struck by other vehicles.
So; because I believe that motorcyclists should have the right to choose whether or not to wear helmets, does that make me "anti-helmet"?
No; it means that I believe that riders should have the choice.
Same logic here.
-
-
(Force YOU to join a union).
From H.R. 413: …Granting public safety officers the right to form and join a labor organization, which may exclude management and supervisory employees, that is or seeks to be, recognized as the exclusive bargaining representative of such employee.
…Requiring public safety employers to recognize the employees’ labor organization (freely chosen by a majority of the employees), to agree to bargain with the labor organization, and to commit any agreements to writing in a contract or memorandum of understanding.
…Providing for bargaining over hours, wages, and terms and conditions of employment.
What I read is that, if the majority of employees freely choose to organize and you didn’t, you have just been forced to join or you take another job.
(Overturn the right to work in 26 states).
From H.R. 413: …Not more than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, The Authority (Federal Labor Relations Authority) shall make a determination as to whether a State substantially provides for the rights and responsibilities described in subsection (b). In making such determinations, the Authority shall consider the opinion of affected employers and labor organizations. Where the authority is notified by an employer and an affected labor organization that both parties agree that the law applicable to such employer and labor organization substantially provides for the rights and responsibilities described in subsection (b), the Authority shall give such agreement weight to the maximum extent practicable in making its determination under this subsection.
What I read is that, if the state’s laws that govern the right of employees to organize and an employer’s right to oppose it, then the Federal Labor Relations Authority will exercise its authority and force the employer to accept conditions of subsection (b), making it easier for employees to organize.
(Increase costs with no guarantee of better service).
From H.R. 413: …Requiring public safety employers to recognize the employees’ labor organization (freely chosen by a majority of the employees), to agree to bargain with the labor organization, and to commit any agreements to writing in a contract or memorandum of understanding.
…Providing for bargaining over hours, wages, and terms and conditions of employment.
Clearly, in a city where they have not had a career department with salaries and benefits added into the city budget, costs will rise and it may or may not improve service.
(There will be no more flexibility. Everything will be legislated and contained in a contract).
From H.R. 413: ...Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Authority shall issue regulations establishing procedures which provide the rights and responsibilities described in section 4(b) for public safety employers and officers in States which the Authority has determined, acting pursuant to its authority under section 4(a), do not substantially provide for such rights and responsibilities.
…Roe of the Federal Labor Relations Authority. – The Authority, to the extent provided in this Act and in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Authority, shall –
…determine the appropriateness of units for labor organization representation…
…supervise and conduct elections to determine whether a labor organization has been selected as an exclusive representative by a voting majority of the employees in an appropriate unit…
…resolve issues relating to the duty to bargain in good faith…
…conduct hearings and resolve complaints of unfair labor practices…
…resolve exceptions to the awards of arbitrators…
…protect the right of each employee to form, join, or assist any labor organization, or to refrain from any such activity, freely and without fear of penalty or reprisal, and protect each employee in the exercise of such right…
…if the Authority finds that any State is not in compliance with the regulations prescribed under subsection (a), direct compliance by such State by order…and
…take such other actions as are necessary and appropriate to effectively administer this Act, including issuing subpoenas requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of documentary or other evidence from any place in the United States, and administering oath, taking or ordering the taking of depositions, ordering responses to written interrogatories, and receiving and examining witnesses.
This speaks for itself. This is the process that will be followed whenever there is a dispute. It is not flexible and it is legislation. Therefore, there will be no more flexibility because decisions of the judges will be final, so to speak.
(Volunteer departments as we know them will cease to be).
…State and local public safety officers play an essential role in the efforts of the United States to detect, prevent, and respond to terrorist attacks, and to respond to natural disasters, hazardous materials, and other mass casualty incidents. As the first to arrive on scene, State and local public safety officers must be prepared to protect life and property and to preserve scarce and vital Federal resources, avoid substantial and debilitating interference with interstate and foreign commerce, and to protect the national security of the United States. Public safety employer-employee cooperation is essential in meeting these needs and is, therefore, in the National interest…
…The health and safety of the Nation and the best interests of public safety employers and employees may be furthered by the settlement of issues through the processes of collective bargaining.
In my opinion, this is the “foot-in-the-door” for the eventual inclusion of other than career fire departments under this legislation. Think about NIMS and FIRE Act. This all came about after 9/11 and essentially put every fire department in this nation under the direct control of the Department of Homeland Security. We want to believe that, since it isn’t explicitly stated that this legislation excludes volunteers, that it does not apply to volunteers and especially since it states in the documents that fire departments in cities of less than 5000 population with less than 25 full time departments are exempt.
That might be the case NOW, but I see nothing more than just a little bit of language in the population of a city and change “full-time” to “any and all”.
Yes; my blog is usually my opinion, but if you can go back to any of the more than 200 articles that I have had published and the thousands of comments that I have made on the fire website discussion boards and show me ONE comment to indicate that I am anti-union, then I will eat all of the union membership cards that I received from UAW Local 865 in East Moline and my union steward pins, I will have for dessert.
I also worked for a company that made furnaces and the work force was union. I was in management and had no problems. No grievances were ever filed against me and many of the employees are my friends today.
I currently work for a company that provides services to a company that employs union workers.
I’m still standing.
So, think what you will.
Just like me; everyone of you are entitled to your opinion.
ATD.
TCSS.
-
Comment by john s cinque on November 17, 2010 at 7:46pm
-
alright guys
this is the problem
the unions at the top levels have been corrupted by the national socialist democrats
and yes i said SOCIALIST
google richard trumpka president os the afl-cio
the IAFF is a part of that so he speaks for the members
i for one will never fall in line and support anythign or anyone that has socialist ties
WAKE UP and look around
-
-
Here are a couple more links. IAFF is the most helpful.
http://www.iaff.org/Events/2009LegCon/PDFs/2009IssuesBook.pdf
http://www.afscme.org/publications/28799.cfm
-
Comment by Mike France on November 17, 2010 at 2:53pm
-
Well i wasn't going to but i will , As a Vol. FF and a Union member [ Local 1000 CSEA, Schenectady County] i read thru these bills which are greek to me, It s seems that Govt again is trying to all not just the a certain group. Here we are considered ''Employees'' when we respond . Would i want to be unionized no, i have never really been a big fan of my union , simply because it's what is in it for the leadership not the little guy , not sure if all are like it, I don't believe that Art is anti career or pro Vol, i believe he is just writing what he feels [ Now i have read his blogs] and it seems to me he knows his stuff as all of you do and he see's both sides . You either agree of disagree with it. let's face facts here the age of the unions telling employers where the bear sh*** in the woods is coming to end and the economy proves it. No one should be forced to belong , but in the real world you have no choice.
-
-
When I include a link in an article, I have taken the time to read the link.
Do not pretend to know what my politics are.
I get my "news" from several different sources, so Cory; don't play the right wingnut game with me. I am not.
Michael: I am not anti-labor. If I were, then why would I write what I wrote about Chillicothe, OH? Did that sound anti-union to you?
And I have stated on numerous occasions that I am every bit as concerned about the budget cuts, short staffing and brown outs.
It seems that anytime a labor issue is brought up, you are immediately labeled anti-this or anti-that.
When you attempt to get the discussion on the table for the sake of discussion, we can't stick to the debate of differences of opinions. No; we have to attempt to drag politics into it, because that's easy.
As if that somehow validates the opposing view.
II am for change and for choice in matters of a person's right to organize or not.
That isn't anti-labor; that is anti-shoved down the gullet.
-
Comment by Paul Combs on November 17, 2010 at 2:22pm
-
Michael - What?! I didn't say they shouldn't have the right to organize, I said they should not be FORCED or MANDATED to organize. Seriously, Brother - not sure what planet you read my response from, but it wasn't earth.
Policy Page
PLEASE NOTE
The login above DOES NOT provide access to Fire Engineering magazine archives. Please go here for our archives.
CONTRIBUTORS NOTE
Our contributors' posts are not vetted by the Fire Engineering technical board, and reflect the views and opinions of the individual authors. Anyone is welcome to participate.
For vetted content, please go to www.fireengineering.com/issues.
We are excited to have you participate in our discussions and interactive forums. Before you begin posting, please take a moment to read our community policy page.
Be Alert for Spam
We actively monitor the community for spam, however some does slip through. Please use common sense and caution when clicking links. If you suspect you've been hit by spam, e-mail peter.prochilo@clarionevents.com.
FE Podcasts
Check out the most recent episode and schedule of UPCOMING PODCASTS
Podcast Archive
Groups
-
Unique HazMat Incidents
45 members
-
Haz-Mat
116 members
-
National Fallen Firefigh…
62 members
-
Operational Guides
73 members
-
"Outside The Box" Engine…
166 members
-
Engine Company Ops
65 members
-
Fire Service Leadership
277 members
-
COMPANY DRILLS
510 members
-
Swiftwater Rescue
10 members
-
Step Up and LEAD
106 members
© 2024 Created by fireeng.
Powered by
You need to be a member of Fire Engineering Training Community to add comments!
Join Fire Engineering Training Community