Categories
Education Featured News

House Approves Collective Bargaining Limitations

The Tennessee House and Senate have approved competing plans overhauling the state’s collective bargaining laws.

But both chambers’ leaders believe they’ll ultimately end up banning unions from negotiating teachers’ labor contracts once everything is said and done.

“I think the vote today indicated that we can get it passed if it’s reasonably drawn and reasonably written. I think we have the opportunity to pass it here,” House Speaker Beth Harwell, R-Nashville, told reporters after she presided over a grueling four-hour debate on her chamber’s floor.

On a 59-39 vote, majority Republicans moved to scale back teachers’ collective bargaining powers.

Opponents included all the House Democrats, one independent and five Republicans. They pitched more than two dozen alternatives to weaken or derail the bill, but only a few tinkering with technicalities passed — the rest were either tabled or later withdrawn.

One opponent to SB113/HB13o, Democratic Rep. Mike McDonald of Portland, wheeled out an easel and poster boards to help illustrate what he thinks collective bargaining has accomplished to aide teachers beyond helping them get better contracts. The system has allowed them to pressure school boards into purchasing additional “instructional supplies” and other educational materials for their classrooms, he said.

A band of Republicans railed against the bill, too. The GOP caucus members who voted against SB113/HB130 included Reps. Scotty Campbell of Mountain City, Mike Harrison of Rogersville, Dennis “Coach Roach of Rutledge, Dale Ford of Jonesborough and Bob Ramsey of Maryville.

Independent Kent Williams also voted against the anti-collective bargaining legislation. The former state House speaker from Elizabethton hinted during the floor debate that the bill was no more than “political payback” because the Tennessee Education Association gives dramatically more money in campaign contributions to the Democratic Party than they do the GOP.

Republicans maintained that their efforts were solely about improving education in Tennessee, and that ultimately everyone — teachers, students and taxpayers — would benefit from loosening the union’s grip on policy and personnel discussions.

GOP lawmakers said they believe the TEA has become a force of obstructionism in education reform discussions over the years, and that the process of collective bargaining between a school board and a single employee organization to the exclusion of all others thwarts input and exchange of new ideas.

“We have allowed a professional organization to hijack education in our state for their own agenda,” said Rep. Mark White, a Memphis Republican.

Far from being an “attack on teachers,” as opponents of the legislation have painted GOP efforts for months this session, SB113/HB130 represents “the most empowering legislation I’ve seen in a long time for teachers,”said Jon Lundberg, R-Bristol.

Eliminating collective bargaining and allowing school boards to consider other viewpoints and voices when drafting new contracts for education professionals “will help (teachers) succeed,” said Lundberg.

Under the House proposal, teachers unions would no longer be able to negotiate salaries, merit pay, use of grant funding, teacher evaluations, personnel decisions along with policies relating to special education programs like virtual school districts.

Unions would, however, still be able to hammer out issues like benefits and staffing decisions.

Powerful Senate Republicans though have said all along they will accept nothing less than a complete repeal of the 1978 Education Professionals Negotiations Act, which mandates that school districts negotiate with a recognized teachers union.

Not only would the Senate prefer no mandate to collective bargaining, but they’d rather teachers and unions “collaborate” with school districts on issues they want to debate on — but ultimately leave those policy decisions entirely up to the school board.

The rest, they say, they’re happy to compromise on.

So what happens now?

The two chambers will likely play a short game of legislative ping-pong where the Senate rejects the House version of the collective bargaining overhaul then the House turns down the Senate version.

Then speakers from both chambers will name three lawmakers to represent the chamber in a conference committee, essentially a compromise group meant to hash out the differences between the two bills.

Harwell said she’d consider naming Education Chairman Richard Montgomery of Sevierville, bill sponsor Debra Maggart of Mt. Juliet and Rep. Harry Brooks of Knoxville to the committee. Although she will make the committee assignments later in the week, it’s unclear whether she’ll swap any of those members for a Democrat as conference committees traditionally included a member of the minority party.

Categories
News Tax and Budget

Casada’s Local Employment Policy Measure Falters in Committee

Not all Republican measures will be a slam dunk this year, apparently.

The former favorite for the Tennessee House speakership watched on as a subcommittee loaded with fellow GOP House lawmakers rejected his attempt to blanket the state with uniform regulations on discrimination, “living wage” and family-leave policies.

Casada blamed the HB598’s setback on “special interests,” but he stopped short of pointing fingers at any one group or another.

“I’m concerned special interest might have gotten the attention of some folks, and they didn’t listen to the majority of voters in the district. That’s purely opinion on my part,” said last legislative session’s House Republican caucus chairman.

Casada is proposing to ban local governments from imposing any anti-discrimination practice or employment policies mandating health insurance, a minimum wage or family-leave requirements more restrictive on businesses than state or federal law.

The bill fell, 7-6. Republican Rep. Steve McManus, the Commerce Committee chairman from Cordova, and GOP Rep. Dennis Roach of Rutledge voted against the measure, along with Independent Rep. Kent Williams, Elizabethton, and four Democrats. Rep. Charles Curtiss, D-Sparta, voted in favor of the legislation with five Republicans.

Gay and lesbian advocates say the bill would have erased any locally enforced discrimination policy or other local rules protecting them based on their sexual preference.

“I think the bill was aimed at our community, the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender community,” said Chris Sanders, a spokesman for the Tennessee Equality Project who added that the bill meddles in local government’s ability to govern.

Both sides of the issue say the fight is far from over.

“This bill is actually about limiting the growth of big government at a local level,” said former state senator David Fowler, now president of Family Action Council of Tennessee. “Just because you can’t win at the state or the federal level doesn’t mean you should run to the local governments and create 348 different sets of laws businesses have to figure out to comply with.”

The issue caught momentum this year when Metro Nashville officials began discussing adding special protections for the GLBT community in its ordinances, an issue FACT believes is bad for both business and taxpayers.

Casada, who has two other versions of the bill sitting in committee, said he plans to talk to the subcommittee’s no-voters to find out what they took issue with and what, if anything, he can change in the bill to win their approval, he said.