Should Ohio unionize court workers?

That's the question that will be before the Ohio legislature, thanks to State Representative Matt Szollosi (D-49th District), who issued the following press release yesterday:

Rep. Szollosi Introduces Bill to Protect Court Workers’ Rights

Legislation Would Allow Collective Bargaining for Court Employees

COLUMBUS – State Representative Matt Szollosi (D-Toledo) introduced legislation today to give specified court employees the ability to enter into collective bargaining.

The legislation would eliminate an exemption from the Public Employees’ Collective Bargaining Law for “employees and officers of the courts” and “employees of the clerks of courts performing judicial functions.” It was born from a situation at the Lucas County Juvenile Court in which court employees voted to form a bargaining unit, but the Court reversed an initial decision and stopped the employees’ effort to organize.

“We want to enable these court workers to negotiate for better wages, competitive benefits and improved working conditions,” Rep. Szollosi said. “It seems only fair to allow this flexibility for public employees who work so hard to keep the public safe and uphold our laws.”

Rep. Szollosi’s legislation now awaits assignment to a House committee for formal hearings.

SIDE NOTE: As I've said before, if the state law specifically excludes you from collective bargaining, you have no 'right' to it, no matter what Szollosi's press release states. And someone should ask Szollosi about those 'better wages' and 'competitive benefits.' These workers already have wages higher than the private sector in the county, and they are consistent with other courts in the area. Their benefits are the same as all county employees and are extremely generous (including minimal co-pays, coverage of just about all health conditions, prescription drug coverage, vision and dental coverage, and health coaches) and, again, better than what is available in the private sector.
***

Why is this even an issue? Because, for about a year, the United Auto Workers has been trying to organize our Juvenile Court workers. They'd been given a voluntary recognition by the judges, because they are, under Ohio law, specifically excluded from collective bargaining. Several things went awry during the negotiations, from the interference of a county commissioner to damage to a judge's tires, resulting in the withdrawal of the voluntary recognition and the rejection of any further discussions.

The UAW, furious with the withdrawal of the recognition, began a public campaign. They took out a full-page ad in the paper and began radio commercials to urge citizens to tell Presiding Judge Denise Cubbon to change her mind. This resulted in my effort to encourage the public - and my WSPD listeners - to also call and share their opinion.

Obviously, the public campaign wasn't successful because the UAW, with Szollosi's help, had a bunch of state elected officials sign a petition urging Judge Cubbon to reconsider. As I detailed in my linked post, the UAW is certainly getting a return on its campaign donations.

But despite the urging by all those state reps who've never been to Toledo, the UAW saw no success, as Judge Cubbon has stood her ground.

So what's a union to do? Well, it does what it always does: failing to gain support within the community, or with voters, or - in this case - with the court, they want to change the law. And they have a willing participant in Rep. Matt Szollosi and, I expect, the other signers of the petition.

Did I mention that this is an election year for state representatives?

Having been a Clerk of Court, I'm pretty confident that this proposal will generate objections from across the state, although some of it may be behind the scenes so as not to anger the unions in Ohio. But support of unionization for workers aside, this is bad policy in general and, specifically, a bad reaction to a local problem. And Ohio legislators and citizens should reject this change in law.

Blade editorial supports judge in UAW flap

Yes, they do get things right on ocassion:

Standing up to intimidation

"In addition to resisting intimidation, Judge Cubbon is showing good judgment in refusing to be stampeded into accepting a contract with wage increases that could be costly to taxpayers, and which she contends might force her to lay off some workers.

That stance puts her at odds with Commissioner Pete Gerken, who is playing two key roles - one as union advocate and the other as a public official charged with spending taxpayer money wisely. With Mr. Gerken, it is sometimes hard to tell where each of these roles begins and ends, and which side he's on.

In this case, Judge Cubbon cannot be faulted for declining to go along with contract terms she says were agreed to by Mr. Gerken without advance consultation with her.
...
In these tough economic times, however, more attention must be paid to the burden placed on taxpayers by the ever-increasing demands of public-employee unions.

Toledo may be a "union town," but we are confident that a majority of discerning residents support Judge Cubbon for her thoughtful and courageous stand."

32 State reps tell judge to let union into court

The Blade story is here, but I have a copy of the actual letter and find it very interesting that state reps from around Ohio found it necessary to tell a Lucas County juvenile court judge what to do.

Have these representatives even been in Lucas County or met Judge Denise Cubbon? And what makes them qualified to tell the judge what to do?

Local representatives who have their name on the letter include Matt Szollosi, Edna Brown, Peter Ujvagi and Senator Teresa Fedor. Interestingly, only Matt Szollosi's signature is on the letter. Szollosi signed all the other names, including his initials in parentheses after the name. If these state reps were so convinced that this is the right thing to do, don't you think they would have taken the time to actually sign the letter themselves?

State Democratic Party Chairman and representative from Catawba, Chris Redfern, said he was involved "because he believes it affected people outside Lucas County."

"I would encourage [Judge Cubbon] to think beyond the impact that her decision will have in the courtroom and think about the community, and I think regionally," Mr. Redfern said. "Having organized labor members can be very positive for a community."

Perhaps Redfern missed the fine print about the costs of this agreement - an additional $2 million over the three-year term of the proposed contract. I wonder how he justifies this as being 'positive for the community'?

The letter to Judge Cubbon:

It is our collective understanding that the employees of the Lucas County Juvenile Court have voted overwhelmingly to form a bargaining unit with representation by the UAW. It is our further understanding that the Court has since reversed its position which initially allowed these employees to organize, putting an abrupt end to any further negotiations, and any hopes that those working men and women will receive the benefits they are seeking through union membership.

The purpose of this letter is to encourage you to, at the very least, resume good faith negotiations so that Court employees achieve a contract with fair wages, competitive benefits and improved working conditions.

Obviously, having granted your employees the right to organize last year, you respected their desire to bargain for improved terms and conditions of employment. Especially in tough economic times, negotiations can prove difficult. However, we have confidence that with renewed efforts, the parties involved can reach satisfactory compromise.

We urge you to reconsider your decision to rescind the employees' rights to organize, and to once again open the lines of communication so that this issue can be brought to a close. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Let's take the points one at a time:

* the employees didn't 'vote' ... they signed cards. They have no 'right' under Ohio law to organize, as judicial employees are specifically exempted from collective bargaining.

* the court employees have good wages, and as a former county commissioner, I know because I voted on their budget. Their wages are competitive with other courts and are certainly competitive with private sector earnings.

* the court employees have highly competitive benefits. As county employees, they have the county health insurance, the county life insurance, drug cards, health coaches, vision coverage and dental coverage. They have the same vacation and holiday schedule as the rest of the county. These benefits are much more generous than the private sector which pays for these benefits.

* they want 'improved working conditions' and I can only wonder what improvements they might want? Better chairs and desks? More amenities in the break room? Are such 'conditions' attainable without a union?

* they want to open lines of communication so the 'issue can be brought to a close.' In case you missed it, the issue is closed. Judge Cubbon rescinded the permission to organize - it's over. Just because they don't like the outcome, they're trying to put political pressure on the judge to change her mind. (I hope the UAW has as much success as the defendants in her court do after she's banged the gavel.)

The names on the letter:

Matt Szollosi
Edna Brown
Tracey Heard
Clayton Luckie
Brian Williams
John Otterman
Ron Gerberry
Lorraine Fende
Jay Goyal
Steve Driehaus
Fred Strahorn
Steven Dyer
Matt Lundy
Bob Hagan
Tom Letson
Dan Dodd
Linda Bolon
Joyce Beatty
Chris Redfern
Eugene Miller
Michael DeBose
Michael Foley
Jennifer Brady
Kenny Yuko
Peter Ujvagi
Armond Budish
Barbara Boyd
Sandra Williams
Michael Skindell
Timothy DeGeeter
Dan Stewart
Sen. Teresa Fedor

I cannot help but wonder if any of these people talked to Judge Cubbon before making a decision about this letter - or if they just trusted what either the UAW or another state rep told them? It would certainly be interesting to call them all and find out.

I also wonder how much these state reps got in campaign donations from the UAW, as that certainly seems to be a contributing factor. According to the paper, "Mr. Szollosi received $10,000 from the state PAC for his 2008 re-election effort, while Sen. Theresa Fedor received $2,000 in 2006." The three county commissioners, at last count, got about $119,000 combined. In checking the Secretary of State's website, I found the following contributions listed from UAW PAC LA435 in Maumee, OH:

Teresa Fedor: $7,500 in 2006
Linda Bolon: $2,000 in 2006
Michael Foley: $1,500 in 2006
Jennifer Brady: $1,500 in 2006
Kenny Yuko: $1,500 in 2006
Peter Ujvagi $350 in 2006
Armond Budish: $1,500 in 2006
Barbara Boyd: $1,500 in 2006
Sandra Williams: $5,500 in 2006
Michael Skindell: $1,500 in 2006
Timothy DeGeeter: $300 in 2006
Brian Williams: $500 in 2006
John Otterman: $500 in 2006
Jay Goyal: $1,000 in 2006
Steve Driehaus: $2,500 in 2006
Matt Lundy: $2,500 in 2006
Bob Hagan: $11,000 in 2006
Tom Letson: $1,000 in 2006

Perhaps the UAW is resorting to pressue from other elected officials because their campaign to get the public to tell the judge to reconsider went no where? Seems the UAW is getting their money's worth, I just don't know if it will have any impact on Judge Cubbon.

Gerken gets rebuffed by judge in unionization issue

According to today's paper, Commissioner Pete Gerken wanted to meet 'face-to-face' with Judge Denise Navarre Cubbon over her decision to rescind recognition of the UAW in the unionization of Juvenile Court employees ... but he was rebuffed.

It's no wonder! In Judge Cubbon's press release yesterday, she wrote:

Earlier this year, Commissioner Pete Gerken, without Juvenile Court’s authority or knowledge, agreed to a union demand involving wage compression, which would cost the County an estimated $2 million over the course of a 3-year contract with the UAW.

So why in the world would the judge now want to meet with the same commissioner who went behind her back to negotiate with his former union and made promises he couldn't keep?

Interestingly, the paper mentions the projected cost of $2 million over three years but fails to include what I think is the most pertinent of facts: that Gerken, without the Court's authority or knowledge, met with the UAW and agreed to a wage demand.

Kudos to Judge Cubbon for looking out for her statutory responsibility and obligation to the functioning of court rather than catering to a local union. If the past is any indication, she will suffer greatly for daring to disagree with the union. The last time an elected official (former commissioner Harry Barlos) didn't cater to the UAW demands, Pete Gerken challenged him in the primary and ended up as a county commissioner after getting about $77,000 in campaign donations from the union. Hopefully, Cubbon will not suffer the same fate.

Did Gerken interfere in the Juvenile Court/UAW negotiations?

I just received this email press release from Juvenile Court, clarifying some statements in the UAW advertisement regarding the unionization of the court employees. It appears as if the UAW did get some special consideration from at least one commissioner for the wage compression item they couldn't get from the judge:

PRESS RELEASE

The Juvenile Court Administration has engaged in lengthy negotiations with the UAW, beginning in the fall of 2006. These negotiations addressed non-economic issues raised by the UAW.

Earlier this year, Commissioner Pete Gerken, without Juvenile Court’s authority or knowledge, agreed to a union demand involving wage compression, which would cost the County an estimated $2 million over the course of a 3-year contract with the UAW.

Since the Lucas County Commissioners slashed the Juvenile Court’s combined 2008 budget request by over $1,000,000.00 ($765,585 for additional personnel and salaries) the Court was concerned how this could possibly be financed.

Upon learning from the UAW of Commissioner Gerken’s agreement, Judge Cubbon requested a written explanation from the three commissioners confirming that there was such a commitment and outlining its details and how it would be funded so as to avoid future layoffs at Juvenile Court.

The commissioners never responded.

To date, it is the understanding of the Juvenile Court Administration that there never was an agreement involving all of the commissioners. It was baffling to read the “open letter” which states that there was such an agreement reached with the commissioners, and yet these same commissioners refused to document this agreement as requested by Judge Cubbon on numerous occasions.

Under Ohio law, Courts are exempt from mandatory collective bargaining. The Juvenile Court has not only allowed, but welcomed, the union to engage in collective bargaining. The Court acknowledges and appreciates the work and commitment of all Lucas County employees, and particularly the employees of Juvenile Court. To that end, Judge Cubbon will not sign a contract which can only be funded with future layoffs of Juvenile Court employees and programs cuts.

The Court’s first responsibility is to the families and children of Lucas County that it serves. It is crucial that the Court focus on this important work that each of us was elected, appointed or hired to do.


Denise Navarre Cubbon,
Administrative Judge