COLLECTIVE BARGAINING IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR

POSITION IN BRIEF
Support collective bargaining in the public sector that maintains the balance between the rights and obligations of employees and employers, with the goal of providing citizens with essential public services.

BACKGROUND

Since the late 1980s, LWVPA has used the position on collective bargaining in support of bills designed to achieve prompt settlement of school strikes and to reduce their number in Pennsylvania. The law covering collective bargaining in the public sector (Act 195) failed to curtail school strikes and efforts to amend the act were unsuccessful.

As public pressure in 1992 forced several school negotiations bills to a vote, LWVPA was active in the development of Act 88, which placed new negotiation provisions into the School Code and repealed language in Act 195 that was inconsistent with these new provisions. Act 88, the first piece of school negotiation reform in 22 years, includes the following measures supported by the League:

• Mandatory mediation.
• Fact-finding initiated by either party.
• Binding arbitration by mutual agreement.
• Publication of the results of final best offer arbitration.

LWVPA continues to monitor legislative proposals dealing with school strike negotiations. Although Act 88 of 1992 has greatly reduced the number of strikes, some questions remain as to whether additional measures may be needed to force closure of negotiations.

POSITION IN DETAIL

Right of Public Employees to Bargain Collectively

The League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania believes that public employees should have the right to organize and to bargain collectively with employers, and supervisory personnel should have the opportunity to “meet and discuss” issues with employers.

Strikes by Public Employees
Public sector bargaining laws must, however, reflect the essential nature of certain public services. To suspend these services even temporarily is to compromise public health and safety. To protect the public, employees such as police, firefighters, and guards at prisons and mental hospitals should be prohibited from striking. At the same time, when employees are prohibited from striking, binding arbitration must be required to resolve impasses and to bring bargaining to a meaningful conclusion. When public employees have the right to strike, the courts must be empowered to enjoin those strikes that threaten the public’s health, safety, and public welfare.

Negotiation Process

Employers, employees, and the public have a stake in avoiding strikes. The negotiation process must be one that provides every possible opportunity to reach an agreement and to avoid impasses. The League believes:

• The bargaining period should be shorter than the current nearly six-month period.
• Mediation should be mandatory when negotiators cannot reach an agreement after a reasonable period of time. Fact-finding can be an important tool for resolving conflicts and should be used whenever there is a possibility that an impasse can be avoided.
• Either party or the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (PLRB) should be able to initiate fact-finding.
• If both parties agree, they should be able to submit their unresolved disputes to binding arbitration (when strikes are permitted).
• Arbitrators should adhere to standards and guidelines and be required to submit a written rationale for their decisions.
• Union security measures such as maintenance of membership and membership dues deductions are valid topics for bargaining, but a union shop is not an appropriate topic for public sector bargaining.
  
  Injunctions
  
  If injunctions are to be an effective means of protecting the public, penalties are an essential enforcement measure; employers should not be required to discuss amelioration of penalties. Once a strike has been enjoined, it is important to continue negotiations to maintain an even balance between the two parties, and to resolve areas of disagreement as quickly as possible. Steps to achieve this could include binding arbitration.
  
  School Negotiations
  
  School district negotiations are unique. The School Code sets a standard for the minimum number of days in a school year, and make-up days are an important factor in school negotiations. The courts and the legislature must consider both what constitutes a threat to a thorough and efficient education and when students’ welfare has been endangered.
  
  The League believes that every effort should be made to curtail long strikes and frequent interruptions of the educational process. Any changes designed to shorten strikes and to create greater incentives to reach a contract agreement should balance employee’s rights in the collective bargaining process with the students’ right to a thorough and efficient education.
  
  The Public Role
  
  The League supports the tradition of private bargaining sessions between employer and employee. The League believes, however, that both sides must make their positions public and that citizens should have the opportunity to comment publicly, particularly before a strike occurs or an impasse is reached. Just as the legislative process should not be immune to public scrutiny, neither should agreements between public employers and employees be reached without public understanding of the issues involved.

Updated 9/1/04

Where We Stand

Government
- Election Laws
- Judiciary
- Redistricting
- Legislature
- Municipal Gov't
- Authorities
- Initiative and Referendum
- Campaign Finance
- Lobbyist Disclosure
- Open Records
- Open Meetings

Social Policy
- Education
- Gambling
- Death Penalty
- Reproductive Choice
- Transportation
- Child Health & Welfare & Juvenile Justice
- Family Issues and Laws
- Fiscal Policy
- Collective Bargaining

Natural Resources
- Land Use
- Water
- Air
- Energy
- Waste Management