Back in 2014, West Virginians – spurred on by right-wing
propaganda over President Obama’s supposed “war on coal” – went to the polls to
give Republicans control over both houses of the Legislature. It was the first
time Republicans controlled the House of Delegates in 83 years, something that was
virtually unheard of in a state where Democrats hold a significant advantage in
voter registration.
The GOP thanked our hard-working, blue-collar voters by
advancing an agenda that was anti-worker, anti-union, anti-education,
anti-woman, anti-poor, anti-minority, anti-LGBT and anti-health.
Key among their actions were:
(1) Passage of right-to-work legislation that says employees of
unionized companies aren’t required to pay union dues, even though unions are
still required to represent them, and
(2) Repeal of the prevailing wage law which had guaranteed that all
workers engaged in the construction of public improvement projects would be
paid a decent wage. This, in effect, takes money away from working people and
gives it back to their employers.
Collectively, these new laws were supposed to bring jobs pouring into the state from employers who were put off by a strong labor presence. So far, I haven't seen that happening. Meanwhile, the working men and women of the state got screwed over
by the Republicans they elected into office in 2014. So what did they do about it?
Two years later, last November, they went out to the polls and
voted them all back in again.
Now, I read that the West Virginia Senate is considering a
bill that would prohibit individuals put out of work temporarily because of a
strike from receiving unemployment benefits. If passed, this would be another
blow to working people and just one more anti-labor effort from our
pro-business Republican legislature.
(Pro-union forces think there may be many more pieces of anti-labor legislation yet to come.)
Under current law, if a worker is on strike and the company
he or she works for stops production, the worker does not receive unemployment
benefits, but otherwise, if the company brings in temporary workers, management
or someone else to do the striking worker’s job, then that worker can get
unemployment. Workers who are not working due to a lockout can also receive
unemployment checks.
If the Senate bill is enacted, workers would not be able to
get unemployment benefits if they are out on strike, regardless of the
production status of the company.
Critics argue that the bill will create an uneven playing
field during contract negotiations, forcing unions to come to agreement on issues more
quickly than they want to because their workers are striking without pay. The bill
would also take away any incentive businesses might have to negotiate in good faith, they say.
Lead sponsor of the bill, Sen. Ryan Weld, R-Brooke, says the
bill does not impede collective bargaining and is in the best interest of
taxpayers. He says it would save the state about $175,000 a year in
unemployment benefit costs, although I don’t know how anyone can accurately
predict the frequency and duration of strikes that may not even happen.
On the other hand, Mike Caputo, vice president of United
Mine Workers District 31 and himself a state delegate, called the bill “another
Republican Party attack on working families.” Both Caputo and fellow delegate Roman Prezioso
think the Legislature should be trying to solve the state’s $500 million budget
deficit instead of nitpicking over labor rights that save very little (if any)
money.
The takeaway here is simple. Sometimes you do get what you deserve.
Just like in Washington, where Alternative President Trump
and his Cabinet of Deplorables are running roughshod over civil rights,
religious rights, freedom of the press, environmental protection, financial
security and anything else they can steal from the public, the people we sent
to Charleston are going to extremes to take away anything that isn’t
nailed down just to feed their individual and corporate greed, leaving the people of
the state floating face down in their wake.
No comments:
Post a Comment