Rachael Stassen-Berger of the Saint Paul Pioneer Press has written an opinion piece recounting the latest in the State Legislatue's action on State union contracts. You can access that article here.
State worker contracts face uncertain future in Legislature
By Rachel E. Stassen-Berger
TwinCities.com-Pioneer Press
Posted:Tue Jan 19 23:01:00 MST 2016
In most labor negotiations, the process is messy but fairly simple.
Management and labor negotiate a contract. They fight over wages, benefits, working conditions and so on. If they reach an agreement and both sides approve it, they're done.
For state labor negotiations over the contracts of state nurses, clerks, prison wardens, managers and others, there's an extra step. After the unions and the state agree on contract terms, the Legislature has to approve the contracts before they're done.
That extra step has added extra complications over the years for the state of Minnesota and is proving particularly onerous this year.
In October, a bipartisan legislative panel -- five DFLers and five Republicans -- voted 5-5 on contracts that cover nearly 30,000 state union employees. In a quirk of the system, a tie vote is the same as taking no action, meaning the bulk of contracts went into effect 30 days later. If the panel rejects the contracts, the state has to bargain them again. If approved, they go into effect until the full Legislature considers them.
Last week, the same panel voted on contracts covering a different group of employees -- state nurses, corrections officers, teachers and librarians at state facilities, the staffs at state schools for deaf and blind students, as well as troopers, conservation officers and other state law enforcement officials. Those contracts, like most of the others, include 2.5 percent raises and other possible increases for many employees.
During all those votes last week, one Republican member of the legislative Subcommittee on Employee Relations was missing. Sen. Michelle Benson, R-Ham Lake, was busy at another state panel, dealing with health care, that Friday afternoon.
For DFLers, Benson's absence meant a series of voice votes approving the remaining contracts -- with Democratic-Farmer-Labor voices clearly voting for the approval and Republican voices' voting against it.
Since there were five DFLers in the room and only four Republicans, the contracts sailed through.
Realizing the votes were on the DFL's side, Sen. Chris Eaton, DFL-Brooklyn Center, asked the panel to try again to pass two of the contracts it rejected months before -- those covering about 2,300 state employees in commissioner and managerial plans. Unlike the other plans, those employees' contracts do not automatically go into effect if the panel takes no action.
"They were short a vote," Eaton said later.
The Republicans realized the same and delayed -- calling for break after break until Benson could rush across the Capitol campus.
Once Benson arrived, Eaton said (in far more legislative language) never mind.
Since those contracts do not go into effect without legislative action, Gov. Mark Dayton has been particularly upset that Republicans on the panel put the brakes on those contracts.
"It's just a terrible, terrible decision and denial of good management principles of the executive branch," he told the media.
He followed up with a letter, asking Republican leaders to reconsider.
"Employees covered by these plans include state patrol lieutenants and captains, human resource professionals, information technology experts, administrative office staff, attorneys, dentists, pharmacists, financial and budget experts, veterinarians, and many other critical positions," Dayton wrote.
But Rep. Steve Drazkowski, R-Mazeppa, has shown no sign of reconsidering.
"I think one of the things that people need to be aware of is that we continue to pay government employees at a rate that is much higher than the private sector," Drazkowski said. On the legislative panel, he suggested rejecting all the contracts and said he hopes the Legislature does just that later this year.
The issue is sure to rise to the fore in the Legislature when members return to St. Paul in March. All the contracts need full votes -- approving or disapproving -- to stay in effect.
Legislators are already preparing.
"We will have to fight it out on the floor," Eaton said. "I don't know why they don't like state employees. They keep the government going, they keep the streets plowed. ..."
But said Drazkowski: "Do I want this to be the marquee issue? I don't have any burning desire or drive for that, but I do want fiscal responsibility."
Rachel E. Stassen-Berger's column appears weekly in the Pioneer Press. Reach her at rstassen-berger@ pioneerpress.com or @rachelsb on Twitter.
Close Window Send To PrinterState worker contracts face uncertain future in Legislature
By Rachel E. Stassen-Berger
TwinCities.com-Pioneer Press
Posted:Tue Jan 19 23:01:00 MST 2016
In most labor negotiations, the process is messy but fairly simple.
Management and labor negotiate a contract. They fight over wages, benefits, working conditions and so on. If they reach an agreement and both sides approve it, they're done.
For state labor negotiations over the contracts of state nurses, clerks, prison wardens, managers and others, there's an extra step. After the unions and the state agree on contract terms, the Legislature has to approve the contracts before they're done.
That extra step has added extra complications over the years for the state of Minnesota and is proving particularly onerous this year.
In October, a bipartisan legislative panel -- five DFLers and five Republicans -- voted 5-5 on contracts that cover nearly 30,000 state union employees. In a quirk of the system, a tie vote is the same as taking no action, meaning the bulk of contracts went into effect 30 days later. If the panel rejects the contracts, the state has to bargain them again. If approved, they go into effect until the full Legislature considers them.
Last week, the same panel voted on contracts covering a different group of employees -- state nurses, corrections officers, teachers and librarians at state facilities, the staffs at state schools for deaf and blind students, as well as troopers, conservation officers and other state law enforcement officials. Those contracts, like most of the others, include 2.5 percent raises and other possible increases for many employees.
During all those votes last week, one Republican member of the legislative Subcommittee on Employee Relations was missing. Sen. Michelle Benson, R-Ham Lake, was busy at another state panel, dealing with health care, that Friday afternoon.
For DFLers, Benson's absence meant a series of voice votes approving the remaining contracts -- with Democratic-Farmer-Labor voices clearly voting for the approval and Republican voices' voting against it.
Since there were five DFLers in the room and only four Republicans, the contracts sailed through.
Realizing the votes were on the DFL's side, Sen. Chris Eaton, DFL-Brooklyn Center, asked the panel to try again to pass two of the contracts it rejected months before -- those covering about 2,300 state employees in commissioner and managerial plans. Unlike the other plans, those employees' contracts do not automatically go into effect if the panel takes no action.
"They were short a vote," Eaton said later.
The Republicans realized the same and delayed -- calling for break after break until Benson could rush across the Capitol campus.
Once Benson arrived, Eaton said (in far more legislative language) never mind.
Since those contracts do not go into effect without legislative action, Gov. Mark Dayton has been particularly upset that Republicans on the panel put the brakes on those contracts.
"It's just a terrible, terrible decision and denial of good management principles of the executive branch," he told the media.
He followed up with a letter, asking Republican leaders to reconsider.
"Employees covered by these plans include state patrol lieutenants and captains, human resource professionals, information technology experts, administrative office staff, attorneys, dentists, pharmacists, financial and budget experts, veterinarians, and many other critical positions," Dayton wrote.
But Rep. Steve Drazkowski, R-Mazeppa, has shown no sign of reconsidering.
"I think one of the things that people need to be aware of is that we continue to pay government employees at a rate that is much higher than the private sector," Drazkowski said. On the legislative panel, he suggested rejecting all the contracts and said he hopes the Legislature does just that later this year.
The issue is sure to rise to the fore in the Legislature when members return to St. Paul in March. All the contracts need full votes -- approving or disapproving -- to stay in effect.
Legislators are already preparing.
"We will have to fight it out on the floor," Eaton said. "I don't know why they don't like state employees. They keep the government going, they keep the streets plowed. ..."
But said Drazkowski: "Do I want this to be the marquee issue? I don't have any burning desire or drive for that, but I do want fiscal responsibility."
Rachel E. Stassen-Berger's column appears weekly in the Pioneer Press. Reach her at rstassen-berger@ pioneerpress.com or @rachelsb on Twitter.
Close Window Send To PrinterState worker contracts face uncertain future in Legislature
By Rachel E. Stassen-Berger
TwinCities.com-Pioneer Press
Posted:Tue Jan 19 23:01:00 MST 2016
In most labor negotiations, the process is messy but fairly simple.
Management and labor negotiate a contract. They fight over wages, benefits, working conditions and so on. If they reach an agreement and both sides approve it, they're done.
For state labor negotiations over the contracts of state nurses, clerks, prison wardens, managers and others, there's an extra step. After the unions and the state agree on contract terms, the Legislature has to approve the contracts before they're done.
That extra step has added extra complications over the years for the state of Minnesota and is proving particularly onerous this year.
In October, a bipartisan legislative panel -- five DFLers and five Republicans -- voted 5-5 on contracts that cover nearly 30,000 state union employees. In a quirk of the system, a tie vote is the same as taking no action, meaning the bulk of contracts went into effect 30 days later. If the panel rejects the contracts, the state has to bargain them again. If approved, they go into effect until the full Legislature considers them.
Last week, the same panel voted on contracts covering a different group of employees -- state nurses, corrections officers, teachers and librarians at state facilities, the staffs at state schools for deaf and blind students, as well as troopers, conservation officers and other state law enforcement officials. Those contracts, like most of the others, include 2.5 percent raises and other possible increases for many employees.
During all those votes last week, one Republican member of the legislative Subcommittee on Employee Relations was missing. Sen. Michelle Benson, R-Ham Lake, was busy at another state panel, dealing with health care, that Friday afternoon.
For DFLers, Benson's absence meant a series of voice votes approving the remaining contracts -- with Democratic-Farmer-Labor voices clearly voting for the approval and Republican voices' voting against it.
Since there were five DFLers in the room and only four Republicans, the contracts sailed through.
Realizing the votes were on the DFL's side, Sen. Chris Eaton, DFL-Brooklyn Center, asked the panel to try again to pass two of the contracts it rejected months before -- those covering about 2,300 state employees in commissioner and managerial plans. Unlike the other plans, those employees' contracts do not automatically go into effect if the panel takes no action.
"They were short a vote," Eaton said later.
The Republicans realized the same and delayed -- calling for break after break until Benson could rush across the Capitol campus.
Once Benson arrived, Eaton said (in far more legislative language) never mind.
Since those contracts do not go into effect without legislative action, Gov. Mark Dayton has been particularly upset that Republicans on the panel put the brakes on those contracts.
"It's just a terrible, terrible decision and denial of good management principles of the executive branch," he told the media.
He followed up with a letter, asking Republican leaders to reconsider.
"Employees covered by these plans include state patrol lieutenants and captains, human resource professionals, information technology experts, administrative office staff, attorneys, dentists, pharmacists, financial and budget experts, veterinarians, and many other critical positions," Dayton wrote.
But Rep. Steve Drazkowski, R-Mazeppa, has shown no sign of reconsidering.
"I think one of the things that people need to be aware of is that we continue to pay government employees at a rate that is much higher than the private sector," Drazkowski said. On the legislative panel, he suggested rejecting all the contracts and said he hopes the Legislature does just that later this year.
The issue is sure to rise to the fore in the Legislature when members return to St. Paul in March. All the contracts need full votes -- approving or disapproving -- to stay in effect.
Legislators are already preparing.
"We will have to fight it out on the floor," Eaton said. "I don't know why they don't like state employees. They keep the government going, they keep the streets plowed. ..."
But said Drazkowski: "Do I want this to be the marquee issue? I don't have any burning desire or drive for that, but I do want fiscal responsibility."
Rachel E. Stassen-Berger's column appears weekly in the Pioneer Press. Reach her at rstassen-berger@ pioneerpress.com or @rachelsb on Twitter.
Close Window Send To Printer
