NAWER group letter opposing collective bargaining rightsfor first Responders

Newsbull ^ | 7/17/07 | Will Fine

[redwill]

July 17, 2007

Honorable Members United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.

Dear Representative,

You are currently considering H.R. 980, the Public Safety employer-Employee Cooperation Act. This ill conceived legislation would expand federal power into the area of local labor relations in an unprecedented and dangerous manner. We, the undersigned organizations, call on you to do everything in your power to defeat this blatant pay-off to organized labor.

[redwill]

Honorable Members United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.

Dear Representative,

You are currently considering H.R. 980, the Public Safety employer-Employee Cooperation Act. This ill conceived legislation would expand federal power into the area of local labor relations in an unprecedented and dangerous manner. We, the undersigned organizations, call on you to do everything in your power to defeat this blatant pay-off to organized labor.

H.R. 980, and the Kildee Substitute, fail as positive public policy on a number of counts. First, and foremost, the legislation would interject the heavy hand of the federal government into one of the most vital public services offered by local governments. Public safety employees and employers are, today, working in cooperation. A large portion of public safety employees currently bargain collectively with their employers. Others, at the discretion and decision of citizens on the local level, do not. It is a clear violation of the very concept of separation of powers and the concept of local control to now mandate a standard alien to the local desires or needs.

Second, H.R. 980 amounts to an unfunded mandate by Congress on state and local governments. Inevitably labor policies dictated by federal bureaucrats will increase costs. These costs, not now deemed relevant or appropriate at the local level, will be bourn by taxes paid at the local level with no financial support from Congress. It is patently unjust for Congress to impose this burden on local taxpayers, especially when there is no need to do so.

Finally, it is the height of hypocrisy for Congress to dictate local labor policies for public safety employees when it is law that numerous federal public safety employees are

expressly prohibited from engaging in collective bargaining. Congress has no moral right to impose higher costs, diminished local control, and inflexibility on local governments while it operates in a completely opposition manner.

H.R. 980 is not legislation dealing with public safety or security. It is a raw, blatant pay-off to union officials. Failing to attract members on their merits, unions have turned to their allies in Congress to have government impose them on workers.

We call on you to publicly declare your opposition to this destructive legislation. If, through whatever circumstance, you are listed as a co-sponsor of H.R. 980, we urge you to remove your name from this travesty and join the overwhelming majority of Americans who support the right of localities and states to determine their own labor policies free of the dictates of union officials or the federal government.

Sincerely,

Will fine Executive Director National Alliance for Worker and Employer Rights

Grover Norquist President Americans for Tax Reform

Ryan Ellis Executive Director Alliance for Worker Freedom

Paul M. Weyrich National Chairman Coalitions for America

Richard Falknor Executive Vice-President Maryland Taxpayers Association, Inc.

Jim Martin President 60+ Association

Colin Hanna President Let Freedom Ring

Dan Tripp Director of Government Relations Americans for Limited Government

Tim Phillips President Americans for Prosperity

Chuck Muth President Citizens Outreach

Mike Chmura* Americans for the Preservation of Liberty

Amy Ridenour* President The National Center for Public Policy Research

*Organizations listed for identification purposes only

[muawiyah]

Ho, hum ~ this is about public sector employees.

The way things have been going in the organized labor business it'll be just a few years and nearly every union member will be working directly for the government.

Wonder why that is?

Well, private sector management figured out some things ~ you gotta' pay people ~ and don't nickel and dime them ~ and stay out of their personal lives.

That dramatically reduced the demand for unionization. Plus, the benefits are fairly decent with the larger firms, and essentially uniform among the smaller ones. That doesn't leave much for unionization to gain.

However, when it comes to government every employee senses very well that most members of the public think they OWN the employees.

Add to that the fact that have little control over the top policymakers (like you can't just go buy stock in New York City for example), and you end up with a very authoritarian situation with an absolute division between management and the workforce.

Unionization is very attractive to people working under those conditions.

Like they say management gets the union it deserves ~ and the target of this bill are city, state and federal agencies ~

Having worked for many decades in America's most unionized workforce I'd like to suggest that the public sector unions serve to inject a work ethic into an elementally corrupt management/labor setup.

Best bet if you don't like unions to organize public workers is to privatize government to the maximum degree and pull it out of providing services it's simply not capable of providing without abusing people.