Teachers Union Target Of Three Bills
Several bills proposed by conservative Sen. Rod Beck, R-Boise, that would dismantle some of the Idaho Education Association’s financial and bargaining power will face strong opposition this week.
Beck calls the three bills an effort to change the status quo of education in the state. Some North Idaho lawmakers call them mean-spirited attempts to bludgeon the education association.
One bill now in the House Education Committee would extend rightto-work laws to public employees. Beck said this would stop the current practice of non-union employees paying union dues for the right to collective bargaining.
Idaho is a right-to-work state for private employers, and Beck’s bill would simply extend that to public sector employees. That would allow teachers to opt out of union dues, which could strike at the heart of IEA’s finances.
Another Beck bill would simply change one word in current state law: “shall” to “may.” The effect would allow districts and/or teachers to opt out of union contract negotiations entirely, eliminating the monopoly the IEA has over collective bargaining. The same Senate committee will hold a hearing on it this week.
The third bill is more complex. It amends the public employees union regulations so that taxpayers stop paying for the retirement benefits of organizations that depend upon employee contributions, such as the IEA and other unions. The state PERSI fund would no longer cover IEA staff under the bill.
As an outspoken leader for House conservatives, Beck has rankled Democrats and union representatives this session by proposing these far-reaching bills and others that some would call radical. Sitting in a Coeur d’Alene Chamber of Commerce banquet here last week, Beck said he’s only trying to act on the will of voters who rejected candidates supporting union positions.
“The members of the state school board association voted for these ideas,” he said. “But the board itself wouldn’t go along with their wishes. What I’m trying to do here is legislate what those members of those schools boards - especially the boards in my area - have wanted to do for a long time.”
The IEA finds Beck’s legislative intent disturbing, noting that all types of organized labor in the state would be affected by the bills.
The bill making the collective bargaining process optional by changing the word “shall” to “may” would do far more harm than good, said David Moracco, associate director of the association in Boise.
Beck’s bills focus too narrowly on the IEA, Moracco said, and the Legislature should carefully consider if legislation aims to set statewide policy for the good of all or if it appears to be an attempt to harm one group or individual. “It is bad policy to not have a vehicle in collective bargaining where both sides can sit down and discuss substantive issues.”
Some lawmakers in North Idaho’s delegation, such as Sen. Gordon Crow, R-Coeur d’Alene, say Beck’s bills could dramatically change the way schools are run. Crow said that conflict between the union and the state’s school boards diverts resources and people who could be working to improve public education.
“We ought to be focusing more of our time and effort on improving the product of our public schools,” he said. Beck’s bills could hog-tie the union’s efforts to affect school policy, so parents and teachers could focus more on content and quality.
Crow emphasizes, however, that he is for higher teacher pay. “An unhappy teacher in the classroom means unhappy students.”
More people than students would be unhappy if any of Beck’s bills find their way to Gov. Phil Batt’s desk for signing, said Sen. Tim Tucker, D-Porthill. Any or all of the bills would likely result in drawn-out lawsuits between the state and unions. “Kids will be suffering under these bills.”