Tweet
After months of high-profile protest, procedural maneuvering and legal wrangling, the anti-union measure in Wisconsin goes into effect today. A controversial 4-3 ruling from the state Supreme Court two weeks ago vacated an injunction against the law, on the grounds that the legislature couldn’t violate state open meetings requirements because… they’re the legislature. Despite the circuitous nature of that logic, the ruling from the highest court in the state stands, and Secretary of State Doug LaFollette formally published the act 10 days ago. Per state law, it takes effect today.
The anti-union law does more than just restrict collective bargaining rights on everything but wages (which can only rise with the rate of inflation) for most public employees other than police and fire fighters, though that’s the most offensive measure. In addition, it forces larger contributions from state employees to pensions and health care. It requires annual re-certification of all public employee unions, which must get a majority of all eligible employees rather than a majority of those participating in the elections. It ends automatic dues collection through employees’ paychecks, forcing unions to find another way to collect dues. It’s basically a cornucopia of measures to stop unions from existing in the state of Wisconsin.
The measure drew mass protests and a walkout of Senate Democrats, and have led to recall elections, which may succeed in flipping the state Senate. But the damage has been done and it’s extensive over the long-term. In other states where similar measures have been tried, like Indiana, it virtually broke the public employee unions entirely. This is one of the few remaining seats of anti-corporate worker power left in the country, and whittling them down to nothing would be a major victory for conservatives.
And you can see this in the fact that the action in Wisconsin was mirrored across the country. It has been successful in states like Tennessee and Idaho. In Ohio, their anti-union bill passed, but now faces the prospect of a citizen veto. In plenty of other states, anti-union measures have either passed this year or in the past, resulting in lower union membership.
So while Scott Walker took a lot of heat for the decision to bust the unions, while he may lose the state Senate in the process, while he may even get recalled himself, and even while he publicly regrets his approach, over the long-term, if this act cannot be repealed, conservatives will have succeeded in decimating the labor movement in a state with a long union history. That will help them win elections and attain everything they care about.
Joan Fitz-Gerald of America Votes Action Fund made this statement:
Wisconsin workers lost their rights today. It’s unacceptable, and we cannot let it stand.
Gov. Walker’s controversial collective bargaining bill aimed at busting the unions and stripping rights from the middle class officially becomes law today. We must stand united today as a national progressive community to send a message to Republicans in Wisconsin and across the country: attacks on working families have consequences.
That’s in the context of a fundraising message for the recalls, and if Walker’s action sparks an actual worker-based movement in this country, maybe there’s something to salvage. But in the meantime, labor will have less of a chance to fight back against attacks on their very existence.
30 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Put it into perspective.
The Wisconsin law affects public employee union members in that state.
from BLS (national): In 2010, the union membership rate–the percent of wage and salary workers who were members of a union–was 11.9 percent, down from 12.3 percent a year earlier. The union membership rate for public sector workers (36.2 percent) was substantially higher than the rate for private sector workers (6.9 percent).
I’d like to thank President Obama and all the national Democratic organizations for fighting this tooth and nai– ohwaitaminnit…
And your point would be what, exactly?
This fight is not over.
Wisconsin Court Supremely Slippery
A botched legal opinion and a chokehold … the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s anti-union opinion is a phrenic blunder unworthy even of a first-week law student …
Article:
Wisconsin Court Supremely Slippery
A law professor issues a ruling on the WI Supreme Court.
The point is that is not “anti-union” but “anti-government union”. There is absolutely no place for unions in the public sector.
And what do we hear from the White House? Crickets.
Boxturtle (If forced to comment, Obama would likely say it was a state issue, not federal)
You ignorant dopes are just pissed because it is going to severely hurt the democratic coffers. You liberals are the most ignorant people ever to exist.
It is a state issue. The Fed has no business getting involved. It is called States Rights…There is this thing called the U.S. Constitution. Google it sometime.
If you believe that fiction that Unions hold so much sway in our body politic anymore, then I do have bridge to sell you. Care to negotiate?
Welcome to Karl roves black box america, suckers.
Wait until the recall elections on the black boxes, that will show them this time, really.
Oh, goody! Another right-wing dupe who bought into over seven decades of John Birch Society Koch-funded anti-public-worker bullshit!
Don’t bother. He hates unions because he associates them with black people, just as he hates the public sector because he’s been trained by half a century of the GOP’s Southern Strategy to hate the poor and nonwhites and women who he’s been told are the primary beneficiaries of government aid (and that to get back at them, he must cut the taxes of rich people):
That’s the thing about the Southern Strategy — and that’s why Michael Steele was doomed as RNC Chair despite the looming 2010 GOP wave when he dared to blow apart the GOP lie that they stopped using the Southern Strategy when Nixon left the White House: It’s not just about using racism for political gain, it’s the corporate and other wealthy and powerful sponsors of the GOP making common cause with bigots in order to push through tax cuts for the elites. Bigots get to strike back at the poor, blacks, and women, while the elites get to get even richer from our suffering.
Wow, you see even this as a racist issue? This is Wisconsin we’re talking about.
1) I did not say the Fed, I said Obama.
2) The federal courts, under various laws including the commerce section of the constitution, DO have say in labor management relations. Perhaps you’ve heard of the NLRB? OSHA? UCC?
3) If you come in here without doing your homework, you’re going to get bit.
Boxturtle (yeah, yeah, don’t feed the troll)
Make sure you add the in your opinion to that statement.
My opinion is that money is not the equivalent of speech. Unfortunately, that opinion isn’t actual law.
Ignorance is believing that bring unwanted children into the world is going to decrease the needs for social services. That’s a conservative view.
I’d say in terms of ignorance that conservatives have liberals beat by miles.
You mean the way George Bush didn’t go after medical marijuana in California and Oregon’s right to die laws or the apopolexy and the desire to codify into federal law the opinion that marriage is between one man and one woman. Conservative hypocrisy is always entertaining. States rights is there battle cry all the way until they actually control federal offices.
The troll is an idiot. I don’t know why we shouldn’t fight idiocy. The problem with the left is that they don’t fight back and let stupid statements stand(at least that is my opinion).
FDR didn’t like the Public Employee Unions either:
The desire of Government employees for fair and adequate pay, reasonable hours of work, safe and suitable working conditions, development of opportunities for advancement, facilities for fair and impartial consideration and review of grievances, and other objectives of a proper employee relations policy, is basically no different from that of employees in private industry. Organization on their part to present their views on such matters is both natural and logical, but meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.
All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.
Obama refuses to back labor in Boeing matter – or the NLRB –
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/29/obama-declines-to-back-hi_n_887006.html
This is where we are heading folks – right where they want us – we need jobs so just let corporations do whatever they want to. Someone posted a great link yesterday to MotherJones on an article on Hormel. I consider it a must-read. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/29/obama-declines-to-back-hi_n_887006.html
Awwwww, now, it’s just a perspective from the bottom of the barrel. So pathetic.
Here’s some good news (hope it holds!):
FEC Lawyers: GOP “Super-Duper” PAC Is Illegal
“The nation’s campaign finance watchdog tosses cold water on the latest scheme from the conservative lawyer behind Citizens United.”
LINK.
Just saying stuff for the lurkers out there, as I believe you are, too.
I know that’s a troll or sock puppet. Says the same rightwing talking points every time there’s something posted at FDL about WI. Duly noted. Liked your response re southern strategy, as it’s apt.
The underlying problem that a lot of normal folks have with public unions is that there is no negotiation between equal parties. The government side is represented by those that pay no cost if they give away the store – the cost can be passed on to the taxpayers without regard. That is, until the taxpayers revolt.
Industrial unions pay a price when they over-reach. Jobs go overseas, or foreign competitors will provide the same product at a lower cost. In fact, some of the most heavily unionized US industries have been hurt the most. This balance of possible outcomes makes the negotiation more balanced and probably creates a better outcome for al.
In the case of public unions, however, we should not be surprised to see a backlash when the cost to the garden variety taxpayer becomes too great. That is especially true when many are hurting economically.
I suspect that we not see a return to the old days and there will be more curbs on public union in the future.
Yeah right next you’ll tell me FDR was a repukelican.
Public union employees have never or ever will get rich.They just want a decent wage DUH!
Where is the outcry when all the states and local governments (and Feds for that matter) are outsourcing public sector jobs yet seeing the costs stay the same or go up? At that point the public sector workers ARE paying a price, across the board, the taxpayers are not seeing the vaunted cost savings, infrastructure continues to fall apart or get sold off in false savings moves.
The only reason people perceive the public sector unions as a problem is thirty years of destruction of the private sector wages and benefits.
So it becomes a move to tear down others. That does nothing to build or re-build a middle class and avoids the real culprits.
You make a good case greybeard. But some of us think we must defend the public employee unions because they are a large portion of the remnant of American organized labor. I think you know that the enemies of the working class will not stop until they have destroyed all unions. The entire working class is under withering attack from a Fascist Oligarchy that has captured (bought) what once was our government. We must fight them on every front.
The unions in Wisconsin today lost and what is their response? Their response is the same as usual which is to behave like a stupid dog that does tricks when their master — the corrupt Democratic Party, holds a meatless bone in front of their faces.
When are the unions in the U.S. going to drop their collective naivete and stupidity and actually fight for once? You know like go on a general strike.
One of the reasons why union membership is falling is because unions play too much politics with the Democratic Party instead of fighting for principles. They look too enmeshed within the corrupt U.S. political system such that many workers don’t really think that unions are going to deliver any benefits to them or fight for anything until its too late like the situation in Wisconsin.
U.S. unions are not sufficiently proactive. They only react when it’s too little and too late such that any countermeasures against the right-wing assault against the middle class are futile.
Now, that the anti-union bill is in effect in Wisconsin, the unions in Wisconsin better get their act together and call a general strike even if laws are broken (btw, those laws aren’t really legitimate and shouldn’t be followed because they are unjust and violate human rights and civil liberties so the laws are just like the old Jim Crow segregation laws). The clock is ticking and the longer the unions in Wisconsin delay a strike, the more difficult it will be for them to win their rights back in the future.
If jobs are being outsourced off-shore, that should be stopped. If the jobs are being outsourced to US employers, I do not have a problem with that – it is an American job after all, either way. In fact, I would tend to prefer a job in the private side as it includes all of the employment taxes paid by the hiring company. Further, contracted jobs leave the government in a much more flexible situation.
I am sure that teachers, firemen and cops best remain under the direct employment of the local government. A bunch of other categories – construction, repairs, IT and the like – can be provided by companies already in those businesses. It is especially true if the tasks are project related with a completion date.
I don’t quite agree that folks are comparing the private unions to the public unions. I think that the push back we are seeing is that the voters believe they are paying the price.