Here We Go Again: Right-to-Work Hearing Today

It was just two months ago that House failed to override Gov. Lynch’s veto of right-to-work legislation and the union busting law went down to defeat.

Today, the House Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitative Services Committee meets to hear testimony on House Bill 1677, a similar bill that would prohibit collective bargaining agreements from requiring non-union employees to pay union fees and would eliminate the requirement that public unions represent non-union members.

House Speaker Bill O’Brien continues to pursue his white whale and has, once again, made the anti-union legislation his highest priority. He claims passage would grow our economy and attract manufacturers — despite all evidence to the contrary. New Hampshire AFL-CIO President Mark MacKenzie disagrees.

“We should be talking about the condition of our secondary roads, our crumbling schools and bridges and expanding I-93, to finish that project,” he said. “We should be investing in New Hampshire and its infrastructure so we can be the kind of state we want to be and provide opportunities going forward. That’s what our focus should be.” [Union Leader, February 8, 2012]

Protect New Hampshire Families has organized a Grassroots Lobby Day to push back against this politically-motivated attack on New Hampshire’s middle class. The fun starts with a pre-hearing briefing at noon at America Votes in Room 302 at 4 Park Street in Concord.

Landrigan: Union Busting Bills Will Benefit Democrats

Kevin Landrigan says there was an “overwhelming torrent of opposition” to the “union busting” bills being debated in the House last week. It has invigorated labor, he says, and has increased the chance for Democrats to take back more legislative seats in November.

These anti-union laws aren’t going to become law. Why? Governor John Lynch is going to veto them. He’s  not going to allow the last year of his career to be colored by a lot of anti-labor legislation.

I don’t believe, in the House in particular, there’s going to be the two-thirds majority needed to override that veto … but there’s going to be a lot of debate and another fight on anti-union legislation.

I think it is firing up organized labor. I think that’s important because, with a presidential election, the chance for the pendulum swinging back and for Democrats to take back some legislative seats is going to increase as a result of this anti-union effort.

Comparing Public and Private Sector Compensation

Testifying in favor of House Bill 1645, which would prohibit public employees from participating in collective bargaining, state Rep. Andrew Manuse (R-Derry) argued that allowing public sector employees to bargain collectively gives them an unfair negotiating position that has lead to higher compensation than they would receive in the private sector.

[P]ublic sector unions are contrary to the public good because they give state workers an unfair seat at the table of government, leaving taxpayers out in the cold. This has led to regular salary and benefit increases in the public sector, even when the economy is tanking. This has also led to a public sector employee base that earns more than their private sector counterparts. [emphasis added]

This is simply not true.

In 2010, researchers for The Center for State and Local Government Excellence collected data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and categorized workers based on the characteristics that help determine earnings: education, training, experience, job location and occupation. They compared similar employees and isolated the effect of public or private sector employment.

The resulting report, “Out of Balance? Comparing Public and Private Sector Compensation Over 20 Years,” found:

• State employees earn 11 percent less, and local workers earn 12 percent less, than comparable private sector workers.

• Over the last 20 years, the earnings for state and local employees have generally declined relative to comparable private sector employees.

• Benefits comprise a greater share of compensation in the public sector, but even after accounting for benefits, state and local employees have lower total compensation than their private sector counterparts.

• Total compensation, including benefits, is 6.8 percent lower for state employees and 7.4 percent lower for local workers, compared with comparable private sector employees.

Keene Sentinel: Anti-Labor Fights Have Only Begun

One day after New Hampshire pro-labor supporters were victorious in their long and emotional fight to kill right-to-work legislation, the Keene Sentinel warns anti-labor fights in the legislature “have only begun.”

Bills lined up for the legislative session that starts in January will call for the end of agency fees … for public-sector unions, will try to establish which issues can be covered in collective bargaining, will limit who can be in a bargaining unit, will bar unions from collecting dues and fees through payroll deductions and will restrict public workers’ abilities to hold public office.

These are all part of an anti-labor campaign of curious purpose. There’s no expressed taxpayer angst in it. No one is saying that the products that we buy or the government services that we receive are unreasonably more costly because of unions. No one shows evidence that unions weaken the state or nation economically.

The editorial concludes by noting all Americans benefit from the health, social and workplace safety programs promoted by organized labor — a message that must be effectively communicated to ward off the “destructive missions” of anti-union critics.

Op-Ed: “Not Much to Celebrate on Labor Day 2011”

The Portsmouth Herald puts the latest attacks on New Hampshire workers in historical context and concludes “there is not much to celebrate on Labor Day 2011.”

The rights and life quality of American workers, once the envy of all the world, are under siege in New Hampshire, Maine and across the nation.

The history of labor is written in blood, sweat and sacrifice. Over the past 150 years, thousands of brave souls have given their lives to end the inhumane practices of child labor, 15-hour shifts and deadly working conditions. Living wages were won not through quiet and respectful dialogue, but through hard-fought and often violent strikes.

The labor battles today are just the latest rounds in a fight waged through the decades by young women in Dover and Exeter mills, granite cutters in Concord, street railway workers in Berlin, Amoskeag textile workers in Manchester or, in more recent history, striking teachers in Plaistow’s Timberlane School District.

Rep. Blankenbeker: Unions Better Not F#%k With Me!!!

Remember Rep. Lynne Blankenbeker, the New Hampshire state Representative and Navy officer who expressed doubt about Osama bin Laden’s death? She’s making news again, this time with a joke about taking out her labor critics: 

From: Blankenbeker, Lynne 
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 3:56 PM
To: Vaillancourt, Steve
Cc: ~All Representatives
Subject: News from the war (almost)
...
Today I got to be the gunner which was fun. The .50cal is quite a gun!
I was never ascared of the unions but they better not F#%k with me
again!!! Just saying.
...
Love,
Lynne

Sent from my iPhone

NH House Opens New Assault on Minimum Wage

More than 20,000 New Hampshire workers would no longer be covered by the federal minimum wage law if a proposal under consideration by the New Hampshire House Labor Industrial and Rehabilitative Services Committee becomes law.

The committee is reviewing a proposal to greatly expand the number of Granite State workers categorized as tipped employees. The employer of an employee who receives more than $30 a month in tips is only required to pay $3.28 an hour in direct wages. New Hampshire law currently limits this minimum wage exception to employees of restaurants and lodging facilities.

Writing in The Lobby (paywalled), Jeff Feingold details the legislative maneuvering.

HB 494, as originally written, is innocuous enough. All it would do is add those who deal cards at games of chance to the definition of “tipped employee.” …

Then committee Chair Gary Daniels, R-Milford, asked “if the committee would like to [do] something more generic” rather than making exceptions one at a time. …

Think cab drivers, hotel workers, newspaper carriers, charter bus drivers, parking attendants, massage workers, hair dressers.

Such workers make so much money in tips, echoed another Republican, that “they don’t need our help.”

Rep. Tammy Simmons left no doubt that this is just one more item on the House’s anti-union, anti-worker agenda. “I think we should be abolishing the minimum wage and let the free market reign,” she said.

HB 494 has been retained for next session.

Quote of the Day: No Justification

In the last seven years of recruiting businesses to move to New Hampshire, not one business leader has ever even asked me if New Hampshire had a right-to-work law, let alone suggested it was a factor in the company’s location decision. No New Hampshire business leaders have ever told me that the lack of a so-called right-to-work law prevented them from expanding or hiring new workers here in New Hampshire. And no New Hampshire workers have ever told me they couldn’t get a job because New Hampshire doesn’t have a so-called right-to-work law.

There is no justification in this case for state government to interfere with the right of private businesses to freely negotiate and enter into contracts with their employees. Therefore, I am vetoing HB 474.

— Gov. John Lynch, explaining his veto of proposed right-to-work legislation

Right-to-Work Sponsor: Goal is to Eliminate Unions

Mark Hounsell served in the New Hampshire state Senate from 1984 to 1988. As a sponsor of so-called right-to-work legislation, he understands — better than most — why it is being promoted and how it will impact New Hampshire’s economy.   

So what is the real reason this bill is being pushed so hard by its supporters? The truth is the bill has nothing to do with a person’s right to work and it has everything to do with eliminating the right for workers to collectively bargain. The truth is the reason for its enactment is to eliminate unions.

I maintain the bill is about union busting from personal experience. In 1985 as a member of the Senate I sponsored right to work legislation. My sponsorship provided me access to the intents and strategies of the Virginia based National Right to Work Committee. The NRW committee believes that if it can pass certain provisions state by state it will effectively cause the demise of unions nationwide.

Labor unions have served New Hampshire’s middle class well. It has been union initiatives that produced a 40-hour work week, overtime pay, vacations and holidays, sick days, safe workplaces, health benefits, retirement and pensions and many other worker benefits. To weaken unions is to weaken New Hampshire’s economy and weaken our middle class.

Lee Quandt on Right-to-Work, Speaker O’Brien & 2012

New Hampshire GOP State Rep. Lee Quandt speaks his mind.

On Right to Work legislation:

The RTW out-of-state advocates claim that if this legislation gets passed then it will increase jobs and we will all be on easy street; just like Alabama, SC, GA and the southern states. Let’s pass RTW and lower our standard of living, our health insurance and those benefits that make NH one of the most vibrant and desirable states to live and work in…

On Speaker of the House Bill O’Brien:

It is obvious that the speaker is looking for higher office and wants to say how he broke the backs of the public sector workers and their families, how he balanced the state budget by denying services to the most needy, handicapped, homeless, and people in need of services.

On the 2012 election:

[T]his is not the last vote that will be taken on [Right to Work], the last vote will be in November, 2012, when the pendulum swings back and cleans out the house one more time.

A Mother’s Day Gift for Working Moms

On the day we honor mothers, it’s worth noting that 71% of women with children under 18 years of age are in the labor force. And as the New Hampshire GOP continues its assault on workers and unions, it’s particularly meaningful to note the advantage these unions provide for working mothers.

A report by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) documents the dramatic advantage unions provide women workers in pay and benefits.

The data suggest that even after controlling for systematic differences between union and non-union workers, union representation substantially improves the pay and benefits that women receive. On average, unionization raised women’s wages by 11.2 percent — about $2.00 per hour — compared to non-union women with similar characteristics.

For the average woman, joining a union has a much larger effect on her probability of having health insurance (an 18.8 percentage-point increase) than finishing a four-year college degree would (an 8.4 percentage-point increase, compared to a woman with similar characteristics who has only a high school diploma). Similarly, unionization raises the probability of a woman having a pension by 24.7 percentage points, compared to only a 13.1 percent increase for completing a four-year college degree (relative to a high school degree).

So, by all means, take Mom out for lunch. But to honor working moms all over the state, call your legislators and demand they stop the assault on unions and put an end to the so-called “Right to Work” charade.

Politico: Guinta “Settles Score with Organized Labor”

Politico’s Jeanne Cummings writes that while most new House members spent their first few months in Washington promoting standard-issue conservative legislation, nine of the 96 House freshmen used the legislative process to “assist donors, protect favored industries or settle scores with their political enemies.” Rep. Frank Guinta was singled out for using his new power to settle scores with organized labor.

Rep. Frank Guinta (R-N.H.), whose candidacy was attacked with about $140,000 of independent expenditures by the American Federation of Teachers and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, introduced a measure that would prohibit funding for any government contract that requires a labor agreement, which critics say gives unionized contractors an edge.

The measure was endorsed by the National Federation of Independent Businesses, which countered the labor Guinta attack ads with more than $30,000 in ads and mailings, and by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which invested nearly $150,000 in independent expenditures supporting Guinta’s candidacy.

Defying logic, Guinta’s spokesman J. Mark Powell explained, ”We can’t afford to divert limited taxpayer resources into union pockets…. It’s not anti-union.”