Home
In this issue
April 9, 2014

Jonathan Tobin: Why Did Kerry Lie About Israeli Blame?

Samuel G. Freedman: A resolution 70 years later for a father's unsettling legacy of ashes from Dachau

Jessica Ivins: A resolution 70 years later for a father's unsettling legacy of ashes from Dachau

Kim Giles: Asking for help is not weakness

Kathy Kristof and Barbara Hoch Marcus: 7 Great Growth Israeli Stocks

Matthew Mientka: How Beans, Peas, And Chickpeas Cleanse Bad Cholesterol and Lowers Risk of Heart Disease

Sabrina Bachai: 5 At-Home Treatments For Headaches

The Kosher Gourmet by Daniel Neman Have yourself a matzo ball: The secrets bubby never told you and recipes she could have never imagined

April 8, 2014

Lori Nawyn: At Your Wit's End and Back: Finding Peace

Susan B. Garland and Rachel L. Sheedy: Strategies Married Couples Can Use to Boost Benefits

David Muhlbaum: Smart Tax Deductions Non-Itemizers Can Claim

Jill Weisenberger, M.S., R.D.N., C.D.E : Before You Lose Your Mental Edge

Dana Dovey: Coffee Drinkers Rejoice! Your Cup Of Joe Can Prevent Death From Liver Disease

Chris Weller: Electric 'Thinking Cap' Puts Your Brain Power Into High Gear

The Kosher Gourmet by Marlene Parrish A gift of hazelnuts keeps giving --- for a variety of nutty recipes: Entree, side, soup, dessert

April 4, 2014

Rabbi David Gutterman: The Word for Nothing Means Everything

Charles Krauthammer: Kerry's folly, Chapter 3

Amy Peterson: A life of love: How to build lasting relationships with your children

John Ericson: Older Women: Save Your Heart, Prevent Stroke Don't Drink Diet

John Ericson: Why 50 million Americans will still have spring allergies after taking meds

Cameron Huddleston: Best and Worst Buys of April 2014

Stacy Rapacon: Great Mutual Funds for Young Investors

Sarah Boesveld: Teacher keeps promise to mail thousands of former students letters written by their past selves

The Kosher Gourmet by Sharon Thompson Anyone can make a salad, you say. But can they make a great salad? (SECRETS, TESTED TECHNIQUES + 4 RECIPES, INCLUDING DRESSINGS)

April 2, 2014

Paul Greenberg: Death and joy in the spring

Dan Barry: Should South Carolina Jews be forced to maintain this chimney built by Germans serving the Nazis?

Mayra Bitsko: Save me! An alien took over my child's personality

Frank Clayton: Get happy: 20 scientifically proven happiness activities

Susan Scutti: It's Genetic! Obesity and the 'Carb Breakdown' Gene

Lecia Bushak: Why Hand Sanitizer May Actually Harm Your Health

Stacy Rapacon: Great Funds You Can Own for $500 or Less

Cameron Huddleston: 7 Ways to Save on Home Decor

The Kosher Gourmet by Steve Petusevsky Exploring ingredients as edible-stuffed containers (TWO RECIPES + TIPS & TECHINQUES)

Jewish World Review March 11, 2011 / 5 Adar II, 5771

Caution on Wisconsin Vote

By Linda Chavez



http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | The vote in Wisconsin to limit public-employee bargaining rights is a decisive turning point in American politics. On Wednesday, Republican state senators passed a stripped-down version of pending legislation to limit collective bargaining without a single Democrat present in the chamber. Democrats may challenge the vote in court, but for now, it looks like a huge defeat for public-employee unions.

Did Wisconsin Republicans overreach? It's too early to tell, but public opinion polls are not going in their favor right now. A New York Times/CBS poll found that 60 percent of Americans oppose weakening public employees' bargaining rights, while Rasmussen reports that 52 of Wisconsin voters oppose such efforts.

Nonetheless, public-employee unions are not particularly popular with the public — they're not even all that popular with private-sector union members. Rasmussen, for example, found that 44 percent of Wisconsin voters in private-sector union households think that public-employee unions have too much power.

The Wisconsin bill does not — as critics claim — take away collective bargaining rights, but it does limit them. The bill requires public employees to vote on union representation every year and to pay their dues directly to the union rather than having them deducted by the state employer. It also restricts certain public-employee unions from bargaining over benefits and other non-wage issues, and it limits pay increases from exceeding changes in the consumer price index. If Republicans are going to win over the public on this issue, they will have to do a better job explaining their position.

First, Republicans should emphasize choice. Individuals should have the right to choose union representation — but in many instances, unions are a bigger impediment to choice than employers are. The Wisconsin bill would put the issue of representation to state employees on a yearly basis — which may be too frequent. But shouldn't employees have the right to vote on the issue at some point in their careers?

Once a union has been certified to represent the employees, future workers are excluded from ever deciding whether they still want union representation unless they win a decertification election. And the rules to decertify the union are stacked against employees who want change. They can occur only during limited windows in the union contract and, in most instances, require at least 30 percent of workers to sign a petition asking for a decertification election, which can be intimidating in a union shop.

If Republicans want to win public opinion on this issue, they should make the case for periodic elections in the workplace, not a single election that may have occurred years or even decades before current employees joined the workforce.

Second, Republicans should question why anyone should be forced to join — or pay dues to — an organization against his or her will. Unions should be voluntary organizations whose members willingly pay dues because they believe the organization provides a service they support. But in most places (except the 22 so-called right-to-work states), once the union wins the right to represent workers, individuals who work in a job covered by a union contract must pay dues. Although Supreme Court rulings have given workers the right to ask for a portion of their dues back if the union is using the money to support political or other activity not related to collective bargaining, the burden is on individuals to fight for their money.

The Wisconsin bill levels the playing field by requiring public-employee unions to collect their dues directly from members. Why should unions be different from other organizations? You're free to join the AARP, AAA, or the ACLU, but those organizations have to solicit your membership, and you'll pay dues only so long as you believe you're getting your money's worth.

Unions argue that if dues weren't mandatory, many workers would become freeloaders benefiting from the union's activities on their behalf while not paying the freight. But the real issue is accountability. Unions aren't accountable to their members if dues are mandatory as a condition of employment.

If Republicans don't do a better job educating the public about these issues, they may win the legislative battle but will lose at the poll that matters most — Election Day.

Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.


JWR contributor Linda Chavez is President of the Center for Equal Opportunity. Her latest book is "Betrayal: How Union Bosses Shake Down Their Members and Corrupt American Politics". (Click HERE to purchase. Sales help fund JWR.)

Linda Chavez Archives


© 2006, Creators Syndicate

Columnists

Toons

Lifestyles