North East Area Labor Council Screening Questionaire
Briefly answer the following questions and return to the Assembly office prior to your appointment. Consider your answers carefully as they are an integral part of your record.
1. Why are you seeking labor’s endorsement?
Earning a “living wage”, and being able to afford a decent home, raise a family, have access to reliable transportation, save for college, obtain adequate medical care and achieve reasonable retirement security are the basic foundations of a strong, vibrant and successful communities. In recent years, the standard of living for most Americans, including those in Lake County and the Arrowhead Region, has been steadily eroding. There are a number of reasons for this erosion, but the situation has been worsened by the recent “financial crisis”. This “crisis” has resulted in hundreds of thousands of business failures, millions of lost jobs, unprecedented numbers of home foreclosures, increases in family breakdowns and untold personal financial distress for tens of millions of American workers. Unless proactive, positive and realistic action is taken to head off further deterioration and weakening of the economic infrastructure which provides jobs for working families in our communities, we are destined to be faced with additional job and benefit losses. If these losses do occur, even more financial burden will fall on families, and on the public institutions we depend upon for basic safety, transportation, education and other necessary services. Strong, decisive, tough and knowledgeable leadership, with a focus on fairness, hard work, shared sacrifice and commitment to balanced and cooperative partnerships, is necessary to stop this precipitous drop in the economic status of the American worker. The support of those workers most affected by the changes in the working environment in this geographic area, is critical to achieving any meaningful progress toward improving the quality of life for as many of our working families as possible.
2. Would you be willing to meet regularly with labor representatives (public, private, service, construction, industrial ) to build a working relationship?
[ Yes ] Absolutely. Establishing a regular schedule for doing so would be a priority for me. Included in these meetings would be regular updates on general economic issues, the financial condition of the County, and any known possible impacts on work force planning for the coming months. A regularly updated public web site would also be part of this process.
3. Do you support a living wage ?
[ Yes ] Please see my answer to question number 1.
If yes, would you support a living wage policy that would set standards for businesses who receive tax-payer subsidies?
[ Yes ] In addition, I would require working agreements with any business receiving tax-payer subsidies that assure a long term commitment to any job creation promises. The agreements would also provide for an accountable method of assuring public investment/subsidies are paid back, in appropriate economic benefits, over a reasonable time period. All of these policies and agreements would be subject to prudent and realistic assessments of existing economic issues, and careful examination of proposed business plans.
4. Do you support privatization or contracting out of city/county services?
[ In General, No ] City and County managers must have the skills to properly, fairly and cooperatively direct the activities they are responsible for. If they cannot achieve the fundamental ends of delivering quality, value and service to the general public they serve, while respecting the basic working conditions and rights of their employees, a bigger issue exists for the city or county in terms of the appropriateness of its leadership. In the same light, it behooves the work force, and its representatives, to address any substantiated shortcomings in the appropriate delivery of quality, value and service to the public in a positive, cooperative and proactive manner with management. Fair and reasonable accountability is required from all participants in any such process. There is no reason, with good leadership and the cooperation of its entire workforce, government cannot be run as efficiently and cost effectively as businesses in the private sector.
If yes, which services?
[ Limited Circumstances] Certain very short term or immediate need functions may not be conducive to full-time or significantly staffed part-time positions, or may be one-of-a-kind or specialty types of services. It may be significantly more efficient and cost-effective to contract these needs out, if the skill sets are not readily available from the existing work force. It would still be prudent, however, to be sure all employee skill set information is properly maintained by the human resources department, in the event circumstances would allow temporary assignment of existing staff to specialty need projects. Should organized labor specialty skills needs arise, the maintenance of close and efficient links to labor hall availability/skills/experience lists would be appropriate.
5. Will you respect the right of workers to form and join unions?
[ Yes ]
If yes, would you support a card check policy that would require businesses who receive tax-payer subsidies to sign card check/neutrality agreements?
[ Yes ]
6. Do you support collective bargaining?
[ Yes ]
7. Do you support agreements reached though collective bargaining?
[ Yes ] However, if financial exigencies arise which might jeopardize the continued employment of a large number of necessary working staff, I would seek joint cooperation in going back to the bargaining table to work out mutually acceptable modifications to any current agreement. I would do so with the expectation reasonable accommodations could be made to keep people working, and avoid furloughs, layoffs or permanent job cuts. If any such process should prove necessary, I would do my best to respect the intent and principles under which the original bargaining agreements were approved.
8. What are your thoughts on furloughs vs. layoffs?
If economic conditions require consideration of compensation and benefit programs to reduce cost, either by curtailing non-essential activities or eliminating certain services, I favor methods of “shared sacrifice” that do not single out specific groups to bear the full burden of any cost saving programs initiated. The goal is to keep as many people employed as possible for as long a period as practical, while maintaining high levels of service. This might take the form of rotating days off without pay amongst differing employee groups, or prioritizing service requirements amongst the same groups and shifting working schedules or responsibilities accordingly. Depending upon the circumstances, I would work with all employees to define workable plans for survival and recovery. These plans would address ways in which affordable pay and benefit levels could be reasonably maintained.
My last option would be layoffs, since this approach could leave many people not only without a job, but families without benefits, also. However, if financial conditions left no choice, I would try and structure any layoff plan so those affected could take maximum advantage of unemployment and other social support services.
Given current economic conditions, and the dire outlook for coming years, it seems prudent to begin to immediately prepare the budgets and reserve funds of the County to support continued critical services and long term employment prospects for present employees. If this is not done now, the situation will only worsen as time goes by. Federal and State funding capacity is already under severe stress, and there do not appear to be any easy answers when it comes to these sources. In addition, many taxpayers are confronting financial duress. This increases the probability any future budget issues will negatively impact County employees and public service levels
9. Do you support Project Labor Agreements?
The concept of Project Labor Agreements has generated a lot of controversy. President Obama issued an Executive Order 13502 (February 6, 2009) encouraging the use of Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) in certain Federal large scale construction contracting situations. The same concepts could be applied to city, county and state contracting.
In principle, I believe PLAs are meant primarily to address issues surrounding the assurance workers are paid a fair and livable wage, receive appropriate and reasonable benefits and training, and have a voice in and work under safe conditions with properly maintained equipment. In general, it is assumed unions have been the working person’s best representation with regard to these issues, and are organized and experienced in advocating these issues on the behalf of working people. I believe the Federal government, with all good intention, has taken a position that working in a balanced atmosphere, where management and working people share not only the common goals of the work objective, but also the common goals of mutual respect and cooperation, is preferable to a situation where excessive profit is put ahead of the “common good”.
With these facts in mind, if PLAs are structured so that the project costs are reasonable and not excessive; the quality of the resulting product is high; working standards, compensation and benefits are realistic; the public receives a fair return on its investment; and the contractor makes a fair and reasonable profit, I am in support of these types of PLAs.
However, in the same light, if any PLA agreements are structured in a way which is wasteful, unrealistically burdensome to the efficient and effective completion of the job, and contain tenets unnecessary for the work at hand, I would not be prone to support them.
In summary, my support of any given PLA would depend upon how well it was written, and the impact it had on a reasonable public expectation of return on its investment.
