A press release from State Rep. Allen Skillicorn:
Skillicorn Files Legislation to Gives Employees the Right to Decide
CRYSTAL LAKE – State Representative Allen Skillicorn (R-East Dundee) has filed legislation to prevent employees who are not members of a labor organization from being required to pay for the collective bargaining process. The legislation, House Bill 672, also says employees cannot be required to engage in certain collective bargaining acts as a condition of employment.
Allen Skillicorn
“To require an employee to join an organization or to pay for the services of an organization they do not belong to goes against a person’s basic right to liberty,” said Skillicorn.
“If Illinois commits to making the bold reform we need to put people back to work, give our job creators the ability to increase hiring, and grow our economy, this is common-sense reform.”
Under current Illinois law, non-members of a labor organization can have money directly deducted from their wages without their consent and given to the labor organization if a new contract is agreed with an employer. Illinois law also allows for bargaining agreements for public employees to contain rules that require employees to join a specified organization, pay certain dues or fees, or contribute to a third party as a condition of employment. Under the changes of House Bill 672, individual employees would have the right to decide if they want to participate in these various activities and could not be obliged to take part without first giving their written authorization.
“We need to put the power back in the hands of employees and cut out unnecessary bureaucratic meddling,” said Skillicorn.
Skillicorn added that his legislative priorities are to grow the economy, lower property taxes and reduce spending by making the bureaucratic process more efficient.
No Dem sponsors means DOA.
The headline bills keep coming from this guy.
Go Allen.
Got to ask yourself, and to who does this benefit?
It’s a means to destroy unions and only benefits employers – and mostly huge employers like Walmart, etc.
Skillicorn is a toady for big business.
But of course he would be – they bought him his seat.
The only “bold reform” Skillicorn is talking about is pandering to his corporate bosses.
Walmart is not unionized, so how could it help that company?
Because when unions are gone we all suffer at the hands of the Walmarts of the world.
Rauner’s agenda includes having state workers getting paid minimum wage.
Once that happens we’re next.
In every state that has enacted “Right to Work For Less” laws the wages of all workers – union or not – have dropped.
Contrary to Allen’s claim, no one is forced to join a union as a condition of employment and worker’s cannot be forced to pay dues used for political purposes.
What right-to-work does is try to starve the unions by requiring them to represent employees in contract negotiation or grievances without them having to contribute to the cost of that representation. It is a tool to crush unions.
http://www.epi.org/publication/right-to-work-states-have-lower-wages/
A paper published by the Economic Policy Institute, an allegedly “non-partisan” think tank with 10 union presidents on its board of directors?
What, you couldn’t find something from a more credible source like Pravda?
I didn’t live here to vote for Skilicorn, but this is what needs to be done to save Illinois.
Unions are killing this state.
I believe that Pravda would be more in your wheelhouse at this point in history, given the right’s new allegiance to Putin and Russia, but you go ahead and continue to hang on to the promise that if we give enough of our money and power over to corporations that someday we’ll get something out of it.
SMH.
Luci – based on what?
How is handing more of our income over to corporations going to save the state?
How is handing any power that we have over to the the corporations that don’t want to pay us a living wage or give us benefits, going to save the state?
How is pandering to corporations who pay little if any tax, going to save the state?
Audrey –
I think if you look at the private sector in bankrupt, overtaxed Illinois, most of us do not get the benefits that some public union employees enjoy and there has been a lot more sacrifice in paying more for health insurance type benefits in non union companies.
In fact, we are all struggling to support public union employees who (some) get automatic, compounded raises each year (and through retirement) and pretty generous health insurance benefits.
I believe I just read that AFSCME union employees get Platinum health insurance plans at Bronze plan prices?
WOW!
As a small business owner, I have managed to buy my own health insurance each year (bronze plan) and pay the full premium.
I have saved for my own retirement.
In other words, I have not relied on taxpayers to support my existence.
Based on my own experience, I don’t buy into the union argument any more.
I think unions are a relic from the manufacturing age at the turn of the 20th century and they need to go or be substantially changed.
For the life of me, I don’t understand how every member of a union gets the same raise/pay increase each year, regardless of job performance.
How is that fair?
You can see what the union effect has done to our state and its residences who are struggling to pay for their own healthcare, save for retirement, send their kids to college, etc.
I feel the same way about pensions for politicians.
Well, I was told on my first job that if I did not join the Retail Clerk’s Union I would be let go.
Cal, the law that exists today states that a union membership cannot be made a condition of employment.
However, an employee cannot benefit from union services – like being represented by union lawyers during a grievance – for free, except in the “Right to Work for Less” states.
So Skillicorn gets to be the sacrifical lamb on the anti-union altar?
One-termer.
Reasonable, there are several inaccuracies/misconceptions in your statement.
First, Illinois is not bankrupt, although Rauner is certainly trying to drive us there.
Second, yes, property taxes are ridiculously high but very, very few Illinois corporations pay income taxes and our personal income taxes are some of the lowest in the midwest – two reasons why our property taxes are so high.
Third, I have no idea what the details of the AFSCME benefits are but I can tell you that if this state started regulating insurance premium rates we would all see major decreases in rates.
Nationalized medicine would be even better!
I would, however, love to know where you read that AFSCME members are getting platinum plans for bronze prices.
Fourth, I doubt that every member of every union gets the same raise, regardless of performance.
I am a small business owner also and if you can afford to buy insurance and save for retirement, you are doing pretty well – congrats.
You have, however, relied on the taxpayers for the success of your business.
All business owners do, just like every citizen relies on other taxpayers to help make their lives easier and safe.
Finally, unions are not relics, they are the working peoples’ only hope of ever getting back a living wage and decent benefits.
If you really think that unions workers get better pay and benefits than you do then demand that you be given the same.
That is how unions built the middle class.
Once unions became viable and powerful, then non-union workers demanded that they be treated better or they would organize.
It was very effective. Instead of slamming what union workers, public or private, get, we should demand that we get the same benefits, wages and protections that people in unions get.
Business has been bashing unions ever since unions were created and that bashing has been effective.
We’ve been brain-washed into believing that we are worse off because of unions when nothing could be further from he truth.
The only power that we have against big corporations is our power in numbers.
If we give that up we’re screwed.
I love how conservatives want to interfere with private contracts between employers and employees.
That is all that RTW is.
Its a law that regulates what kind of contract an employer can enter into with its employees.
So much for less regulation, smaller government.
Audrey – here is link to an article about health insurance.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/daily-southtown/opinion/ct-sta-berg-column-st-1216-20161215-story.html
As a scientist by training, I guess I believe somewhat in survival of the fittest. (And yes, there are many examples where this model does not apply to all union workers and many exceptions. I get that.)
I feel jobs and pay will settle on a natural equilibrium based on need, what the market will bear (or pay for the service/product) and the skill/intelligence/work ethic of the person providing the goods or service.
People who are good at their job will get paid more and people who are not so good at their job will do as well.
That’s just the way it is in the real world.
To me, the government and unions to some extent, prop up pay/benefits (and subsequent cost of goods and services) unnaturally.
Collective bargaining is used to establish benefits and pay for all members, regardless of their skill or work ethic (in many cases).
If we got rid of some of the power of unions to demand unrealistic pay and benefits (in some cases) that are not in the mix for non-union workers, yes, you would see some people struggle but these people would also struggle in the private sector.
Should a group of bad workers be protected with the same benefits and pay as a really good worker?
You would also see others with good skills and work ethic do just fine outside of the union umbrella.
they would figure it out like just like the successful non-union worker.
s far as workplace protection, perhaps this is where the benefit of a union should remain, but I think there are now thousands of laws (both federal and local) and employer mandates in place to protect non-union workers.
If you want an example of government intervention affecting cost and prices, look at the price of college.
It’s been documented that college tuition would be less if the government would curtail the easy availability of federal loans: http://www.mindingthecampus.org/2017/01/how-federal-student-loans-increase-tuition-and-decrease-aid/ Sometimes government intervention causes the reverse effect of its intention.
You and I won’t agree about this but some changes need to be made in Illinois to get us back on track.
If not, there will be a tipping point where union workers will be losing their jobs as businesses, people, and wealth leave the state due to high taxes and lack of opportunity.
There won’t be enough taxpayers left to support the jobs and benefits that unions demanded during a time of distress.
Reasonable, you have an unrealistic, yet sweetly naive, belief in the generosity of corporate America.
But I’m afraid, it’s misplaced.
Over the past several decades, productivity in the US has gone way up while middle and working class income has remained stagnant or has even gone down.
Corporate America is not interested in anything but profits.
It doesn’t care about human beings.
What you’ve repeated above is the meme that they’ve been selling for decades and it’s garbage.
In addition, fearing that “all of the taxpayers” will leave the state, is silly, especially since the vast majority of Illinois corporations, while here and happily taking “subsidies” from every chance they get, do not pay taxes.
We are a state of over 12 million people, I wouldn’t worry that the state will empty in the near future.
As workers, citizens and the primary taxpayers in Illinois, the only power that we have is the power in numbers.
They know it and that is why they desperately want to get rid of it.
If you help them by railing against unions, you will only be screwing yourself in the in the long run.
Reasonable – “survival of the fittest” as a scientific construct is only valid when all other variables are equal, right?
In this case, the employees may be the most ‘fit’, but large employers have heft that singular employees simply do not have.
Sticking with the fitness theme, I am reminded of a showcase match decades ago between Chuck Norris, the highly fit karate extraordinaire, and a sumo wrestler.
Norris didn’t win, despite some really great moves.
Sometimes it doesn’t matter how fit you are, there’s just too much mass to overcome.