Romeo Area Tea Party

Posts Tagged ‘Right to Work’

Romeo Area Tea Party presents Paul Kersey, Director of Labor Policy at the
Mackinac Center for Public Policy in a discussion of “Right to Work.”

Paul Kersey became director of labor policy at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy in September 2007, having served as the Center’s senior labor policy analyst since December 2006. As director, Kersey leads the Center’s Labor Policy Initiative and researches labor and employment issues.

Kersey holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics from the University of Michigan-Dearborn. In 1993, he received his Juris Doctor from the University of Illinois.

After practicing law in Livonia, Mich., for several years, Kersey served on the staff of the U.S. House of Representatives Government Reform and Oversight Committee. He then spent three years at the National Right to Work Committee as director of state legislation. In that role, he analyzed and responded to labor legislation in all 50 states.

Come hear Paul’s presentation of the “Right to Work” issue on:

MONDAY

April 23, 2012 – 7:00 PM

The Palazzo Grande 54669 Van Dyke (south of 25 Mile Rd.)
Shelby Township, Michigan 48316

Admission: Free

It is widely recognized that the US House of Representatives has “the power of the purse,” which Wikipedia defines as “the ability of one group to manipulate and control the actions of another group by withholding funding, or putting stipulations on the use of funds.”  The House had the opportunity to tighten these purse strings recently, with an amendment offered by Rep. Guinta from NH.  The subject at hand was Project Labor Agreements, or PLAs, which are described and supported here, and opposed here.  

Only weeks into his presidency Obama had issued an Executive Order that stated, “it is the policy of the Federal Government to encourage executive agencies to consider requiring the use of project labor agreements in connection with large-scale construction projects in order to promote economy and efficiency in Federal procurement.”  Further on in the Order, large-scale is defined as “where the total cost to the Federal Government is $25 million or more.”  Other terms mentioned in this Order, such as “encourage” and “consider requiring,” appear to leave some discretion to the person(s) doing the procuring and hiring.  However section 3(a) states, “executive agencies may … require the use of a project labor agreement by a contractor.”

Writing for Michigan Capitol Confidential about the amendment in question, Ken Braun covers the following: the vote results (a tie), statistics for union vs. non-union labor, a link to Competitive Enterprise Institute, and their “Labor Scorecard.” 

There have been 2 more votes since Braun’s piece, so Miller’s score has moved up, from an “F” to a “D.”

My own “in-a-nutshell” understanding is that if PLAs are mandated, essentially only union members will be hired.  Removing the PLAs will prevent discriminating between union, and non-union (or merit) shops. Just 1 in 5 construction workers belong to a union.

Responding to the pushback from conservatives, Ms. Miller posted the following on Facebook,  

“My response to today’s edition of the Michigan Capitol Confidential”

by Candice Miller on Thursday, March 31, 2011 at 11:10am

In today’s edition of the Michigan Capitol Confidential, a vote of mine was called into question and I would like to take this opportunity to respond.

No current federal law mandates the use of project labor agreements on projects that are partially funded with federal dollars.  The Guinta amendment would have been a mandate on state and local governments that they not enter into project labor agreements on such projects. 

I take a state’s rights view of this issue and would leave the determination on whether or not to use project labor agreements to state and local units of government who are directing these projects.  My vote against the Guinta amendment was not a vote in favor or PLA’s, it was a vote in favor local control and flexibility to make a determination without federal interference on what works best for them.

Will Congresswoman Miller reintroduce an amendment, that would narrow Guinta’s proposal to the federal level of government-funded projects, and protect the right for managers of federal projects to chose, to have the “control and flexibility” to hire non-union, merit-shop workers for federal construction projects?  By voting to defeat this amendment Rep. Miller voted to use the power of the purse to put “stipulations on the use of funds,” funds that would be used to hire only union workers, who make up 14% of the construction workers. 

As part of the Tea Party movement, we encourage our members to keep close watch on current legislation and their representatives’ voting record, and to give them feedback (Ken Braun’s ‘Politician Puppy Training’).

Read the links, gather some more information, and contact your representative to let him/her know this issue is on your radar.

Candice Miller     202-225-2106  Washington office

                            586-997-5010   district office

Thaddeus McCotter     202-225-8171  Washington office
                         734-632-0314 and 248-685-9495    district offices