News Story

Union Surrenders Member Benefits To Keep Unenforceable Clause In Contract

Some teachers could lose as much as $12,700

A union representing workers in the Wyoming Public Schools district gave up as much as $12,700 in annual salary and concessions that would have been paid to its members so the union could keep language in the contract that makes the payment of dues or fees mandatory as a condition of employment.

But the state's right-to-work law makes that illegal if the contract takes effect after a specific date, and, Matt Lewis, director of finance and human resources for Wyoming Public Schools, said district officials believe that clause is not enforceable.

The Kent County Education Association wanted the district to leave language in the contract that says if a teacher fails to pay dues or fees to the union, the district would begin "involuntary payroll deductions." In return, the union gave up paid leave days and altered the salary schedule by as much as $12,700 a year in some instances, Lewis said.

"Preserving that language in the contract until 2016 earned us a lot in return," Lewis said.

A separate state law prohibits school districts from deducting union dues or fees from teachers' paychecks.

Michigan Education Association UniServ Director Sandy Paesens, who represents the unions in the Wyoming Public Schools, did not respond to a request for comment.

The district has since stood by its belief that the clause is not enforceable. In April, the union asked the district to fire a bus driver who was not paying dues or fees to the union and the district rejected that request. 

When the right-to-work law was passed in December 2012, many unions negotiated with school boards so they could extend their contracts for several years before right-to-work became effective on March 28, 2013.

Some unions gave up salary and benefits to get that agreement with their districts.

Patrick Wright, senior legal analyst for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, said the union security clause in the Wyoming district was put in before March 28, 2013, but did not take effect until Aug. 15, 2013. That means it has no legal standing.

Lewis agreed.

"The union security clause is valid but innocuous," Lewis said. "In other words, we are a closed shop, but the district cannot threaten termination of an employee who refuses to pay union dues."

Audrey Spalding, education policy director for the Mackinac Center, said the negotiations to keep language that benefited the union by forcing people to still pay dues or fees wasn't in the best interest of teachers.

"This clearly shows that the union doesn't care what is best for the teachers but what is best for the union," Spalding said. "They gave up thousands of dollars per employee for unenforceable language."

Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.

Commentary

Reforming Michigan's Civil Asset Forfeiture Law

Legislature should follow Minnesota's example

A new Minnesota law on civil asset forfeiture prevents the government from keeping money and property seized without a criminal conviction. 

As noted by Nick Sibilla from the Institute for Justice:

Now the government can only take property if it obtains a criminal conviction or its equivalent, like if a property owner pleads guilty to a crime or becomes an informant. The bill also shifts the burden of proof onto the government, where it rightfully belongs. Previously, if owners wanted to get their property back, they had to prove their property was not the instrument or proceeds of the charged drug crime. In other words, owners had to prove a negative in civil court. Being acquitted of the drug charge in criminal court did not matter to the forfeiture case in civil court.

Civil forfeiture (as opposed to criminal) allows law enforcement agencies to take property from people merely by saying they believe it is connected to illegal activity, forcing the burden of proof to the citizen. Police units often use the practice to expand their budgets.

This has led to rampant abuse in Michigan and nationwide. The federal government seizes more than $4 billion per year while the state has taken at least $250 million since 2001.

There are a few bills that would help curb these abuses, but the state should require a conviction before assets can be forfeited. It is time for Michigan to establish true due process and property rights by following Minnesota’s example.

Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.