PAGE 6 | June 16, 2017 | NORTHWEST LABOR PRESS
AT THE OREGON LEGISLATURE:
Labor’s Agenda
So much to do. And just three weeks to go.
STILL TO BE WORKED OUT
PAST THE FINISH LINE
Local union-killing ordinances?
Not in Oregon.
Remember the anti-union Taft-
Hartley Act from history class?
Passed in 1947, it allows states to
ban any union contract that
requires workers to pay union dues.
Twenty-eight states have passed
the so-called “right-to-work” laws
since then, but for more than six
decades, no one thought that the
law meant cities and counties
could pass right-to-work laws too.
Then last November, the Sixth U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals said they
could. The decision could open the
floodgates to local legislation
intended to weaken unions — in
states where anti-union forces
aren’t strong enough to pass state
right-to-work laws.
But in Oregon, lawmakers just said
“hell no” to that possibility. SB
1040 guarantees the right of
employers and labor organizations
in Oregon to agree to union
contracts that require labor union
membership as a condition of
employment — to the full extent
allowed by federal law. That
guarantee means city and county
elected leaders in Oregon can’t pass
“right-to-work” ordinances.
Because there’s no clearer union-
or-antiunion litmus test than right-
to-work, the votes on SB 1040
leave no doubt who labor’s most
open enemies are in the Oregon
Legislature. A vote against SB 1040
is a vote to allow local
governments to cripple local
unions. Who voted against it?
Republicans — but not all of
them. [See the list below.]
SB 1040 passed the Senate 17-12
on April 25 and the House by 41-
17 on June 5. As of press time, it
was awaiting the governor’s
signature.
In both chambers, every Democrat
voted for it. And in the Senate
every Republican present voted
against — in effect declaring
themselves enemies of organized
labor. In the House, 17 Republicans
voted against it, but eight
Republicans voted it for it. The vote
is important enough that every
union member ought to know
how their legislators voted.
The legislators who voted against SB 1040
Mike Nearman
(Independence)
Brian Boquist (Dallas)
Ron Noble (McMinnville)
Alan DeBoer (Ashland)
Ted Ferrioli (John Day)
OREGON HOUSE Andy Olson (Albany)
Bill Post (Keizer)
Fred Girod (Stayton)
Greg Barreto (Cove)
Werner Reschke (K. Falls)
Bill Hansell (Hermiston) Cliff Bentz (Ontario)
David Smith (Port Orford)
Tim Knopp (Bend)
Sal Esquivel (Medford)
Sherri Sprenger (Scio)
Jeff Kruse (Roseburg)
Jodi Hack (Salem)
Dennis Linthicum (K Falls) Cedric Hayden (Roseburg) Duane Stark (Grants Pass)
Gene Whisnant (Sunriver)
Alan Olsen (Canby)
Rick Lewis (Silverton)
Kim Thatcher (Keizer)
Mike McLane (Powell Butte) Carl Wilson (Grants Pass)
OREGON SENATE
Limit the number of managers
Oregon public sector unions have been making this
point for years: If you’re looking to increase efficiency
in government, look first at the managers. Don’t cut
the front-line staff who are doing the work. Since
2011, state agencies have worked to achieve a goal
of having at least 11 workers for every manager.
Now, HB 2332 requires state agencies with more
than 100 employees to figure out a maximum ratio
of supervisory employees to nonsupervisory
employees, and report that to the Legislature every
two years. State agencies that exceed their
supervisory ratio can’t fill supervisory positions
unless they get an exemption from Oregon
Department of Administrative Services. A work
group studying the issue will report back by
February 2019. [Passed House 57-3, Senate 30-0;
awaiting governor’s signature.]
A very small step against the very
big problem of wage theft
It doesn’t look like Oregon lawmakers will do much
to combat wage theft this year, but they did pass one
bill promoted by the union-backed Oregon Coalition
to Stop Wage Theft. It has to do with employers
falsifying timecards. All too often, unscrupulous
employers force workers to submit, sign or attest to
wage records that misrepresent the hours they’ve
Chuck Thomsen (Hood
River)
Jackie Winters (Salem)
worked - if they want to keep their job, or get paid.
That can make it difficult to prove that wage theft
occurred. (Wage theft is when an employer fails to
pay workers the amounts they’re legally owed in
wages.) Right now, employers face no penalty for
falsifying timecards. HB 3008 corrects that. It
prohibits employers from requiring workers to create,
file or sign documents about hours worked that
contain information the employer knows is false.
When that happens, HB 3008 gives workers the
right to sue, and a court can order damages of
$1,000 or more per violation, plus attorney fees. The
law also gives the Oregon Bureau of Labor and
Industries (BOLI) the power to assess civil penalties
up to $1,000 per violation. [Passed House 53-5,
Senate 23-4; signed by governor June 6.]
More opportunities for apprentices
on state construction projects
HB 2162 mandates that state construction contracts
of over $5 million require contractors to make sure at
least 10 percent of the work hours are performed by
apprentices. The requirement also applies to
subcontractors that do at least 25 percent or $1
million of the work. Oregon Building Trades Council
objected to the initial version of the bill, but
supported the final amended version. [Passed House
53-3, Senate 26-4; awaiting governor’s signature.]
WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE? Outside the Oregon Capitol June 6, the T-shirt lays it
out: Oregon’s personal income tax accounts for 68.7 percent of the state budget, and its corporate
income tax accounts for 5 percent.
Budget cuts, or corporate tax
increases: What will they decide?
demanding. Or they may not. Corporations pay lower
overall taxes in Oregon than in any other state.
The Oregon Legislature is scheduled to adjourn July 10,
but lawmakers still haven’t finalized their most important
work — deciding how much to spend on public
services, and who to tax to pay for it. Oregon faces a $1.4
billion budget shortfall over the next two years. Part of
that is a long-planned reduction in federal funds for
Medicaid (Oregon Health Plan). Legislators may increase
taxes on the healthcare industry to maintain insurance for
over a million Oregonians. And they may increase taxes
on corporations, as a union-backed coalition is
Major transportation investment
Top priority for Oregon building trades unions is a plan to
invest $8 billion in transportation infrastructure over the
next decade.
Lawmakers tried
and failed to get
Republican votes
for that in the
last legislative
session.
Newest proposal to cut PERS
Egged on by business groups, lawmakers are looking at another cut
to public employee retirement benefits. SB 1068, introduced June 6,
would shift more of the cost of Oregon’s Public Employee Retirement
System (PERS) onto workers. Right now, participating public
employers are on the hook for making up PERS system investment
losses in the 2008 financial market meltdown. SB 1068 would divert
2 percent of payroll that’s now going into employee retirement side
accounts (IAPs) and use that to fill in the pension funding shortfall. It
would start with 1 percent in July 2018 and then add another 1
percent during the 2019-2020 budget cycle. After that, if employer
contributions increase more than 2 percent, the burden would be
split 50/50 with employees — up to 4 percent of payroll.
HELD UP IN THE SENATE
Rights and Relief for Renters
About 1.5 million Oregonians – four out of every 10
residents — are renters, and rents have been rising fast.
HB 2004 would relax a statewide preemption on local rent
control ordinances: Cities or counties would be allowed to
limit rent increases on rental properties that are more than
five years old, so long as landlords are guaranteed a fair
rate of return, and a hardship appeal process is
established. The bill would also bar “no-cause” eviction
after six months of occupancy. And it would require
landlords with five units or more to pay tenants relocation
expenses equivalent to one month’s rent for a “good cause”
eviction, such as significant renovation or sale. The bill
passed the House 31-27 on April 4, and on June 8, the
Senate Human Services committee voted to recommend
passage. But at press time, it appeared to be several votes
short in the Senate.
Fair Work Week
SB 828 would require large retail, hospitality, and food
services employers to provide new employees with an
estimated work schedule, and give current employees two
weeks' notice of their work schedule, pay for last-minute
employer-requested schedule changes, and extra pay
when shifts are separated by fewer than 10 hours. They
would also have to offer additional hours to existing
employees before hiring new employees or subcontractors.
It passed the Senate Workforce Committee April 20 but is
having trouble finding enough votes to pass the Senate,
even though Democrats hold a 17-13 majority there.