Well the New Hampshire House Finance Committee burned the midnight oil, literally, last night. It sought to sneak by an amendment deep within the state budget to severely curtail the public employees' unions ability to bargain fairly with the State of New Hampshire.
Source: Unions: Bargaining would end, Plan: at-will status if contract expires (Concord Monitor, 3/24/11)
This is just another example of the dirty tactics the GOP is up to in our Statehouse. Instead of creating jobs they are dead set on destroying the ability of middle class citizens to make a livable wage.
Unions: Bargaining would end
Plan: at-will status if contract expires
By Karen Langley / Monitor staff
March 24, 2011
Union leaders and Gov. John Lynch said yesterday that a change the House Finance Committee made to a budget bill would effectively end collective bargaining for public employees in New Hampshire.
The provision would give public employers full authority to determine employee wages, benefits and terms of employment after a contract expires. The workers would continue as at-will employees until a new contract was reached. Republican lawmakers approved the change to collective bargaining laws Tuesday evening as an amendment to a budget bill. Rep. Neal Kurk, who introduced the amendment, said the threat of losing contractual protections would moderate union demands, leading to less expensive contracts.
The New Hampshire House Finance Committee is attacking state employees in a move they claim would "level the playing field" for state employers and would save the state money on future contracts. But it appears that this is simply not true. The committee has proposed to make all expiring contract employees turn into "at-will" employees of the state. Thus at the moment the contract expires said employees could find their benefits gone and their salaries cut to the bone if the employers wanted it done. In effect, there is no reason for the employer to deal with the employees since he will can do whatever he wants after the contract expires. So where is this level playing field? And why is it so tilted to the employers side?
Rep. Neal Kurk claims that this amendment would also override existing language in contracts that deals with these expiration situations. For example, if a contract stipulates the conditions that would take place in cases where the employees are working beyond the contract length. Rep. Kurk claims the contract language will be nullified by his amendment. I am not a contract lawyer, but even I can foresee extensive litigation taking place if the state even attempts to put this amendment to the test.
Yesterday, the leaders of state labor unions denounced the proposal. Mark MacKenzie, president of the New Hampshire AFL-CIO, called the amendment an "unprecedented attack" on public workers and called on House lawmakers to remove the provision.
The provision does not in itself end collective bargaining for public employees. But by voiding the terms of an expired contract, the provision would allow employers to wait out negotiations and then pay workers whatever they like, said David Lang, president of the Professional Fire Fighters of New Hampshire.
"Why would you have a mutual agreement when you knew full well at midnight at the end of the month you could do whatever you wanted?" Lang said.