l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 http://articles.boston.com/2011-04-27/news/29479557_1_unions-ob
House votes to restrict unions
Measure would curb bargaining on health care
April 27, 2011|By Michael Levenson, Globe Staff
House lawmakers voted overwhelmingly last night to strip police officers,
teachers, and other municipal employees of most of their rights to bargain
over health care, saying the change would save millions of dollars for
financially strapped cities and towns.
The 111-to-42 vote followed tougher measures to broadly eliminate collective
bargaining rights for public employees in Ohio, Wisconsin, and other states
. But unlike those efforts, the push in Massachusetts was led by Democrats
who have traditionally stood with labor to oppose any reduction in workers’
rights.
Unions fought hard to stop the bill, launching a radio ad that assailed the
plan and warning legislators that if they voted for the measure, they could
lose their union backing in the next election. After the vote, labor leaders
accused House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo and other Democrats of turning their
backs on public employees.
“It’s pretty stunning,’’ said Robert J. Haynes, president of the
Massachusetts AFL-CIO. “These are the same Democrats that all these labor
unions elected. The same Democrats who we contributed to in their campaigns.
The same Democrats who tell us over and over again that they’re with us,
that they believe in collective bargaining, that they believe in unions… .
It’s a done deal for our relationship with the people inside that chamber.
’’
“We are going to fight this thing to the bitter end,’’ he added. “
Massachusetts is not the place that takes collective bargaining away from
public employees.’’
The battle now turns to the Senate, where President Therese Murray has
indicated that she is reluctant to strip workers of their right to bargain
over their health care plans.
DeLeo said the House measure would save $100 million for cities and towns in
the upcoming budget year, helping them avoid layoffs and reductions in
services. He called his plan one of the most significant reforms the state
can adopt to help control escalating health care costs.
“By spending less on the health care costs of municipal employees, our
cities and towns will be able to retain jobs and allot more funding to
necessary services like education and public safety,’’ he said in a
statement.
Last night, as union leaders lobbied against the plan, DeLeo offered two
concessions intended to shore up support from wavering legislators.
The first concession gives public employees 30 days to discuss changes to
their health plans with local officials, instead of allowing the officials
to act without any input from union members. But local officials would still
, at the end of that period, be able to impose their changes unilaterally.
The second concession gives union members 20 percent of the savings from any
health care changes for one year, if the unions object to changes imposed
by local officials. The original bill gave the unions 10 percent of the
savings for one year.
The modifications bring the House bill closer to a plan introduced by
Governor Deval Patrick in January. The governor, like Murray, has said he
wants workers to have some say in altering their health plans, but does not
want unions to have the power to block changes.
But union leaders said that even with the last-minute concessions, the bill
was an assault on workers’ rights, unthinkable in a state that has long
been a bastion of union support. Some Democrats accused DeLeo of following
the lead of Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin and other Republicans who
have targeted public employee benefits. “In the bigger world out there,
this fits into a very bad movement to disempower labor unions,’’ said
Representative Denise Provost, a Somerville Democrat who opposed the bill.
Under the legislation, mayors and other local officials would be given
unfettered authority to set copayments and deductibles for their employees,
after the 30-day discussion period with unions. Only the share of premiums
paid by employees would remain on the health care bargaining table.
Geoff Beckwith, executive director of the Massachusetts Municipal
Association, said that, even if the bill becomes law, municipal workers
would still have more bargaining power over their health care plans than
state employees. “It’s a fair, balanced, strong, effective and meaningful
reform,’’ he said.
Unions lobbied to derail the speaker’s plan in favor of a labor-backed
proposal that would preserve collective bargaining, and would let an
arbitrator decide changes to employee health plans if local officials and
unions deadlock after 45 days. Labor leaders initially persuaded 50
lawmakers, including six members of DeLeo’s leadership team, to back their
plan last week. But DeLeo peeled off some of the labor support in the final
vote.
Representative Martin J. Walsh, a Dorchester Democrat who is secretary-
treasurer of the Boston Building Trades Council, led the fight against the
speaker’s plan. In a speech that was more wistful than angry, he recalled
growing up in a union household that had health care benefits generous
enough to help him overcome cancer in 1974. He said collective bargaining
rights helped build the middle class.
“Municipal workers aren’t the bad guys here,’’ he said. “They’re not
the ones who caused the financial crisis. Banks and investment companies got
a slap on the wrist for their wrongdoing, but public employees are losing
their benefits.’’
The timing of the vote was significant. Union leaders plan today to unleash
a major lobbying blitz with police officers, firefighters, and other workers
flooding the State House. Taking the vote last night at 11:30 allowed
lawmakers to avoid a potentially tense confrontation with those workers, and
vote when the marble halls of the House were all but empty.
Michael Levenson can be reached at m*******[email protected]. |
|
