Mandatory Public Employee Unions
Who benefits from collective bargaining?

Recent TV news from Beaver County, Pennsylvania, should provide some enlightenment to Kentuckians on one of Governor Paul Patton’s payback initiatives: mandatory collective bargaining for the state government’s workforce.

It seems that a high school recycling club in Beaver County organized a volunteer campaign to clean up a nature area suffering from the effects of ugly litter. The club’s members did a great job of removing trash and beautifying the area’s natural environment.

Who could object to such a noble gesture? The county government’s public employees’ union officials. The unionized maintenance crew, which had more routine cleanup than it could handle and whose contract did not include the area in question, demanded that students cease and desist their cleanup. Union officials were angry and claimed that their consent was necessary before any such volunteer cleanup could occur.

Ultimately, elected officials prevailed on the side of the students, but the flap dampened the idealism and spirits of young people “trying to do good.”

Unionization (collective bargaining) of the state government’s workforce continues to be a driving cause for Governor Patton, who launched his first effort in 1998. Failing twice to have his initiative approved by the legislature, he has brought Kentucky one step closer to his goal of mandatory collective bargaining with a simple stroke of his pen and an executive order. His push for mandatory collective bargaining for this workforce would cover tens of thousands of state employees.

Unlike the private sector where businesses can raise prices to cover the costs of collective bargaining, governments have only one thing with which to bargain: tax dollars. Likewise, unionized employees have only one powerful tool with which to bargain: the strike.

While the governor advocates a “no strike clause” in any union contract, such clauses are a fool’s dream and have proved useless. A union’s primary tool of power is the strike and threat of strike. “Sick outs” are frequently organized in an attempt to get around such clauses. Also, where courts assess fines for illegal strikes, the fines are routinely forgiven as a condition of settlement.

In late 2001, 23,000 Minnesota state workers walked out on strike and idled close to half of the entire state’s workforce. The governor was forced to call out the National Guard in order to provide critical services.

Given these examples, and the fact that there is no public clamor to unionize Kentucky state workers, it seems there are plenty of other legitimate issues deserving attention as the eight-year Patton administration winds down. As the state prepares to elect a new governor, certain other areas are more worthwhile targets for positive change and reform. To wit: Seriously dealing with the reported chronic corruption in the Transportation Cabinet (bribery, “pervasive pornography viewing” on state time and state computers, etc.); bringing state spending in line with revenues but not squandering surpluses as occurred in recent years; limiting a governor’s power to pardon convicted criminals and indicted individuals without any oversight; and curbing a governor’s “end of term” tradition of wholesale cramming of political appointees into merit positions of guaranteed job security. This practice makes certain departments unproductive political bird roosts.

In the end, the unions promise only what state employees already have - job protection and secure incomes. And the unions want to also collect dues from those who do not even choose to be members. State employees already have job protection through a longstanding and successful merit system. In addition, they get, by statute, annual salary increases of five percent. A recent study has shown that benefits for Kentucky state employees dramatically exceed those of Kentucky’s private sector workers for comparable jobs.

The next governor should nix the public employee collective bargaining initiative. Public employee unionization undeniably drives up the cost of government and robs government officials of control. Further, the legislature should re-exert its authority over this exigent issue. No governor should be able to make such a rudimentary governmental change by a mere stroke of the pen.

Pat Freibert is a former Kentucky state representative from Lexington
editorial@lanereport.com

Back to Perspective Index

Back to September Issue

Copyright 1996-2003, by Kentucky Business Online.  All rights reserved.

Editorial content is copyright 2003, Lane Communications Group
All editorial material is fully protected and must not be reproduced in any manner without prior permission.

The Lane Report is a trademark of Lane Communications Group.  All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.