When you talk about cutting collective bargaining rights for public employees, the labor unions come out in droves. As they should. Thats why we form unions. One solid voice to speak for the membership.
Today was no different. At the committee hearing for Senate Bill 37, “an act relative to management rights under collective bargaining” members and representatives from many of the public sector unions came out in strong opposition to this bill. To speak against the bill was Kurt Ehrenberg from the NH AFL-CIO. Glen Milner from the Professional Fire Fighters Association (PFF-NH). James Allmenginger spoke on behalf of NEA-NH. Harriet Spencer spoke on behalf of AFSCME. Even the unions who were unable to attend, like AFT-NH, submitted written testimony against the bill.
All of the testimony was pretty much the same. Why are we attacking the collective bargaining process that has worked so well for everyone in New Hampshire for the last forty plus years.
“It guts much of collective bargaining and much of the collective bargaining agreements in existence,” said James Allmenginger, NEA New Hampshire.
“We see this as an attack on public employees in New Hampshire,” said Kurt Ehrenberg, political and legislative field director for the New Hampshire AFL-CIO.
“It is a radical piece of legislation that upsets the apple cart and takes the state back 40 years” said Glen Milner of the PFF-NH
SB37 basically gives all the power to management by making everything ‘management rights’. This means that the ‘management’ can set all the rules around, evaluations, disciple, layoffs, and much more. According to Senator Bragdon “all these things is still subject to negotiations”. If management sets the rules why would they ever need to negotiate about it?
At the hearing it also became more evident who was pushing for this type of restrictive legislation. The NH School Boards Association was one of the organizations advocating for the this bill. Their ‘concern’ is all about teacher evaluations. They would want more control in creating (and imposing) their version of teacher evaluations.
Norma Love of the Associated Press paraphrased it perfectly when she wrote:
“Betsy Miller, executive director of the New Hampshire Association of Counties, said her group supports anything that increases managerial prerogative. The changes — if adopted — would give more authority to managers, she said”
Collective Bargaining works when both sides have something to win and something to loose. There must be give and take from both sides. This type of legislation is contrary to the collective bargaining process.
If the NH School Boards Association has an issue with teacher evaluations, they should look at some of the contracts that other cities and towns have passed. The Nashua Teachers’ Union (AFT), the Rochester Federation of Teachers (AFT) and Hillsboro Federation of Teachers (AFT) negotiated a teacher evaluation as part of their contract. This allowed the city and the union to compromise on how the process should work.
Even after all of this information today, I am still confused as to why a very moderate Senator Bragdon would be sponsoring this bill? Sen Bragdon was the former chairman of the Milford School Board (now just a member). What is the real goal of this legislation? Is it really about evaluations or is it about layoff procedures (another negotiated process)? Or disciplinary procedures (another negotiated process)? Only time will tell.