Senate Expected to Consider Unionizing Rights for Public Safety Employees
By Karoun Demirjian, CQ Staff
A bill that would provide collective-bargaining rights for police officers and firefighters appears headed for Senate passage with the likely help of at least 11 Republicans, many of whom are often on the other side of organized-labor issues.
The Senate is expected Tuesday to consider a cloture motion to proceed to the bill (HR 980), which would give public safety employees the right to unionize in any municipality with a population of more than 5,000. The measure would not, however, override stronger state laws on collective-bargaining rights.
The legislation, which passed the House, 314-97, last summer, is expected to clear the 60-vote hurdle needed to advance legislation in the Senate with the help of those 11 Republicans, five of whom are facing re-election in November. The 11 cosponsored a similar Senate bill (S 2123) ­ legislation that Senate leaders are expected to eventually substitute for the House version if the bill proceeds toward a final vote.
The bill “will mean better wages, hours, working conditions and benefits for those we count on in times of crisis,” said Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. “We may never be able to put a fair price on heroism, but this legislation is a start.”
Opponents fear that the bill could result in an unreliable public safety force. In a letter sent to Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., last week, three Cabinet members ­ Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, and Labor Secretary Elaine L. Chao ­ said the bill would “upset our nation’s carefully-developed emergency response functions” and “reduce the flexibility needed to prevent and respond to a shifting series of threats and hazards.”
They said they would advise President Bush to veto the measure if passed.
Differing With Labor
Some of the Republican senators backing the collective-bargaining bill have fared especially poorly in rankings from the AFL-CIO. In 2007, the AFL-CIO gave Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, the author of the Senate bill, a lifetime ranking of four out of 100 on labor-related issues; John E. Sununu of New Hampshire received a lifetime ranking of 10 out of 100 the same year.
“There’s only one explanation for this; it’s sort of a reflexive salute to men and women in uniform,” said Norm Ornstein, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. “Anything requested by the police and fire organizations, who have some potency in many local areas when they make their own endorsements of candidates, is something [members of Congress] listen to.”
The bill is backed by the Fraternal Order of Police and the International Association of Fire Fighters, among others.
Election Year Support
Among the Senate bill’s GOP backers, Sununu, Ted Stevens of Alaska, Gordon H. Smith of Oregon, Norm Coleman of Minnesota and Susan Collins of Maine are running for re-election this fall. All five are in competitive races; Sununu and Coleman face particularly tough fights to hold on to their seats.
Four other backers are scheduled to face the voters in 2010: Gregg, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Mel Martinez of Florida.
The bill also is backed by Republicans Pete V. Domenici of New Mexico and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine.
For Republicans facing tough election campaigns, said Gary Burtless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, “any bit of the Democratic coalition that they bring away from the Democratic candidate is going to be helpful.”
The right to collective bargaining is a top priority of police and firefighters, who are currently allowed to unionize, in varying degrees, in about 35 states.
The bill would outlaw strikes but otherwise grant broad collective-­bargaining rights over hours, wages and working conditions to public safety workers in all but the smallest towns ­ enabling more than 125,000 police officers to unionize, according to James Pasco, executive director of the National Fraternal Order of Police.
“Police and other public safety personnel are the only individuals in the entire workforce in the United States that don’t have the right to collectively bargain nationwide,” Pasco said. “It appears unlikely that we’re going to get it for our members by moving from state to state.”
But local governments argue that the sweeping federal measure flouts the rights of states, which are granted all powers not delegated to the federal government under the 10th Amendment to the Constitution.
“One size does not fit all. What works in New Hampshire may not work in New Mexico,” said Neil Bomberg, principal counsel for the National League of Cities, which opposes the bill. “It’s problematic. ... A number of states will be forced to change their collective-bargaining laws.”
Under the terms of the bill, the Federal Labor Relations Authority has 180 days to determine which states meet the minimum standards for collective-bargaining agreements. States whose existing laws meet or surpass that standard would not be required to make changes.
The legislation is expected to have the most pronounced effect in states such as Texas and Arizona, which prohibit labor unions from forcing workers to join them, and in cash-strapped smaller cities in states with partial collective-bargaining rights.
Although the cloture motion is expected to be adopted, it is not a vote that the majority is taking lightly. Barack Obama, D Ill., and Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., are both expected to return to Washington before the vote in an effort to ensure the measure clears the 60-vote threshold.