HOUSE VOTE MAY COME NEXT WEEK ON COLLECTIVE BARGAINING BILL

HOUSE VOTE MAY COME NEXT WEEK ON COLLECTIVE BARGAINING BILL

House Speaker Bill Batchelder (R-Medina) said Wednesday he hoped to have a management-friendly rewrite of Ohio’s public employee collective bargaining bill ready for a floor vote next week.

He outlined that timetable as the House Commerce & Labor Committee conducted its second hearing on the Senate-passed measure (SB 5) with testimony from proponents.

“I hope to have it out here next week at some point,” Rep. Batchelder told reporters after the House floor session.

Passage of the legislation appears assured, given the Republican 59-40 majority in the chamber.

Speaker Batchelder

“I have not done a head count. I would be surprised if there were not enough votes here,” Mr. Batchelder said. “I think some people have perhaps had a crisis in terms of how they view this thing in terms of the militancy of some of the people who are involved.”

Thousands of police, fire, teacher and other state and local government employee unions have descended on the Statehouse previously in protest of the legislation that would bar public workers from striking and sharply restrict matters subject to contract negotiations.

There were no crowds Wednesday.

There had been indications that the House would hold three weeks of hearings.

“It’s going to be the equivalent of three weeks because they’re going to meet every day,” Speaker Batchelder said. “The point is, how many days of hearings do you have. We’re looking at nine days, probably. But we’ll see what happens. I have no idea what amendments the members have.”

Later on Wednesday, Mike Dittoe, communications director for House Republicans, said there was no specific timeline for voting on the legislation. He said Rep. Batchelder would work with Commerce Chairman Joseph Uecker (R-Loveland) on the process.

“While we do anticipate the bill will be voted on in the near future in committee and on the floor, an exact timeline has not yet been set,” Mr. Dittoe said.

The bill would scrap binding arbitration for public safety forces, a provision that he acknowledged had, “in a general sense,” worked well during the last 27 years the current law has been in effect.

“The difficulty is, of course, that cities dealing in that context have had serious economic repercussions, budgetary repercussions. So I’m not so sure that the mayor of Akron would agree with that, for example. I think (he) feels differently,” Rep. Batchelder said.

He discounted the possibility of exempting police and fire, which the state of Wisconsin has proposed in its pending legislation on the same topic.

“The problem is that if you exclude that whole area you vastly diminish the ability of cities, particularly cities, to control costs,” he said.

“This is an interesting situation because, very frankly, policemen have always been special favorites of the Republican caucus and vice versa. I think they’ve endorsed more of our members probably than anybody except the Teamsters,” the Speaker said.

Rep. Batchelder said alternative methods of resolving impasses in lieu of binding arbitration were under review, along with other potential changes in the Senate bill.

“Well, I’m an old country lawyer, and we’re always trying to improve things. We’ll be looking at all kinds of alternatives to a great deal of the language there,” he said.

“We’ve discovered that, and again not to be censorious in any way, that there are parts of the bill obviously that will require a little bit of work. They had a 99-page amendment, and that always scares me,” he said.

Parity: Separately, a member of the committee hearing the proposal to curb the bargaining power of public employee unions called for parity between the wages and benefits of government workers and those in the private sector.

Rep. John Adams (R-Sidney) said some private employers require workers to pay as much as 50% of their health insurance premiums, while the Senate measure would mandate employees pay at least 15% of an overall plan.

“I believe you can go higher. I think that’s where you can start,” Rep. Adams said in an interview.

“When I look at the private sector employees, those who pay the bill, especially small business, it’s anywhere from 20 to 30 to 40 (percent), and I know a company that’s a good sized company where their employees pay 50 percent of their health care. I want to see parity,” he said.

Rep. Adams said he believes the legislation should be strengthened, also adding parity with the private sector in the area of wages and benefits.

“I think we have to look at the escalating costs of payroll in the public sector, yes, we do,” he said during a break in an hours-long meeting to hear testimony from supporters of the bill that Sen. Shannon Jones (R-Springboro) introduced.

Sen. Jones said the proposal would protect benefits for all public employees.

“It simply asks them to pay a share of those benefits, just like their counterparts in the private sector do,” she said in previous sponsor testimony.

“For health care coverage, employees would pay at least 15% of their overall plan. Many local government employees currently pay less than 10%, while the average private sector worker pays more than 20% of his or her health care premium,” Sen. Jones said.

Testimony: Rep. Adams raised the parity issue during questioning of Superintendent John Scheu of Hardin-Houston Local Schools in Shelby County.

“As a former teacher, I do not feel that teachers are overpaid as some suggest; I feel teachers are fairly compensated,” Mr. Scheu said.

His district of 910 students relies on state aid for 60% of its funding. He said an anticipated state budget cut to education of at least 10%, to help deal with a projected $8 billion revenue shortfall, would cost his district $400,000.

Mr. Scheu said the bill would give local districts flexibility they need to help cushion the cuts. He said being able to eliminate automatic step increases would save about $65,000. Requiring employees to pay 20% of health insurance costs would save the district $110,000.

“These two provisions of (the bill) alone would mean saving the jobs of three beginning teachers and an aide position,” he said.

“Instead of automatically laying off teachers in a (reduction in force) with the least seniority, this bill would give districts the flexibility to consider other factors – such as teacher performance,” the superintendent said.

Mr. Scheu, who has been involved in negotiating six contracts over the last 12 years, acknowledged in response to a question from Rep. Matt Szollosi (D-Oregon) that the current collective bargaining law overall had worked well.

“I feel I have a good relationship with our union,” the superintendent said. However, he said the current law, enacted in 1983, had not worked as well in a previous district.

The chairman of a non-profit advocacy group in the Springboro School District voiced strong support for many aspects of the bill, and suggested strengthening it in some areas.

“Reforming education requires reforming collective bargaining,” said David Petroni of Educate Springboro, a group created to inform district residents about local issues and encourage them to take an active role in them. It has networked with similar organizations in 15 other school systems.

He endorsed the bill’s move to prohibit all public employee strikes, and to adopt a proposed dispute resolution process, which would replace binding arbitration for police and firefighters.

“We believe the proposed 85% cap on the public share of insurance premiums for education may not fulfill its intended purpose to reduce local and state government insurance costs,” Mr. Petroni said.

“It seems possible to negotiate a better benefit package such as zero deductibles and low out-of-pocket limits creating a Rolls-Royce insurance plan at citizen expense,” he said. “Limiting spending for health insurance (medical, dental, disability, vision, other) to a specific percentage of revenue would close this potential loophole.”

“Our situation in Ohio is a simple mathematical equation. We cannot allow government to spend more than the private sector produces. Eventually, you run out of money,” Mr. Petroni said. “We are at that point today; there is no more money for public services.”

Vice Chairman Ron Young (R-Leroy) appeared incredulous at benefit levels negotiated in the Springboro district that the witness outlined.

“It seems absurd that they would negotiate these kinds of agreements. It’s just hard to fathom why they would agree to these kinds of terms,” Rep. Young said.

He said management in the district appeared to be more interested in placating the union instead of negotiating.

Rep. Bill Coley (R-Middletown) said the pending bill would shine a light on school boards and the contracts they negotiate. He said they could no longer blame state mandates for higher costs.

“The elected official is responsible for the contract he negotiates with the employees. There’s one thing for (the bill) – they’re going to have nowhere to hide after this,” Mr. Coley said.

Kelly Kohls, a founding member of Educate Ohio who identified herself as an often-dissenting member of the Springboro Board of Education, said collective bargaining had placed a stranglehold on districts.

She said that over the last three years, students had felt the effect of budget cuts while faculty and staff had received “reduced raises” and continued benefit packages that “far exceed” parity with the community.

“Yes, I said reduced raises … meaning more income than they had last year. While our community median income dropped 1.5% last year, our district employees have had increases averaging 2.5% under what they call a pay freeze,” Ms. Kohls said.

She cited step raises as the reason for pay increases despite a freeze on base salary levels.

“Due to collective bargaining our employees pay less for health insurance than the national average prior to 1999. Our children, on the other hand, have gone without materials and supplies in the classrooms, field trips, busing to the high school, and extra-curriculars now cost … $475 per child per activity, making this too expensive,” Ms. Kohls said.

In other proponent testimony:

• Teacher Carol Katter of St. Marys said she had lived “with the stigma of being a union dissenter” throughout her 25 year career. “I’ve been harassed and bullied to join, I’ve been threatened that I was going to be ‘watched closely,’ I’ve been chided for ruining the 100% school union membership, I’ve been intimidated to tears, and I’ve even been classified as ‘cheap’ for not wanting to pay union dues,” she said. Ms. Katter related details of a long-running battle with the Ohio Education Association over her opposition, based on religious beliefs, of joining a union. “I don’t know why I can’t opt out completely,” she said.

• Barry Tiffany, Administrator of Sugarcreek Township, Greene County, voiced support on behalf of the Ohio Public Employer Labor Relations Association. He said the organization of human resources and labor relations professionals representing public management was not trying to “gut” the collective bargaining law, but to restore a balance between employee rights and the authority of government. “Management must be free to manage public agencies and decide matters of core public policy without having to bargain with un-elected union leaders to do so,” Mr. Tiffany said. “Decisions regarding funding and spending priorities must be made by elected officials and professional managers of state and local government, not un-elected arbitrators.

• The Buckeye Association of School Administrators, Ohio Association of School Business Officials, and Ohio School Boards Association endorsed the measure. They voiced concern, however, over a provision that would limit a current management option to pay the employee’s share of retirement. “We feel that eliminating this option may not affect all employees equally and in some cases only lower the compensation of a few administrative employees,” the groups said.

The committee was to convene for a third hearing after the House session Thursday.