Michigan's Unionized Workers Need to Know Their Rights

 

Michigan's new right-to-work law is slowly starting to benefit workers around the state. Some already have the ability to exercise their rights but others are still waiting. The law applies to union contracts formed, modified or extended after March 28, 2013.

 

While the state's labor law is in this hybrid transition, it is more important than ever for workers to understand their rights regarding union representation.

 

Right-to-work gives Michiganders the ability to fully opt-out of paying union dues or fees, making it illegal for a union to get a worker fired for not paying them. However, many workers under contracts pre-dating the law's effective date still have no choice but to financially support the union at their workplace. But, even under pre-existing contracts, workers do have more rights than they may realize.

 

National Employee Freedom Week, celebrated June 23rd - 29th, was formed by the Nevada Policy Research Institute for the express purpose of informing workers of

their rights pertaining to union membership. This year the Mackinac Center and more than 55 other organizations participated in NEFW to empower workers to decide what type of union representation best meets their interests.

 

Most workers currently in a union did not have the opportunity to decide if they wanted the union at their workplace. James Sherk, a senior labor economist at the Heritage Foundation, estimates that only 7 percent of private sector workers had the opportunity to vote for the union which represents them. The other 93 percent joined a union that was already in place when they were hired.

 

Almost all unionized workers must accept union representation for contract negotiations and for things such as grievance hearings, even if the worker feels they can do a better job themselves. However, workers have a choice as to their membership status and to what the best type of union representation is for them.

 

Any union member may choose to become an agency fee payer. These rights, commonly known as "Beck rights," come from two Supreme Court cases: the 1977 Abood v. Detroit Board of Education and the 1988 Communication Workers v. Beck, which apply to the public and private sectors, respectively. An agency fee payer will only pay the proportion of dues that funds collective bargaining. They do not need to pay for union political activity (with some exceptions such as 'internal union communication'). Unfortunately, becoming an agency fee payer

can be a slow and difficult process and, depending on the contract, there can be a small window for when the change can take place.

 

Although not a legal requirement, becoming an agency fee payer generally means withdrawing from the union. This means workers who exercise their Beck rights are unable to participate in the union decision making process, even in matters paid for by the agency fee such as contract negotiation.

 

Another option is to become a religious or conscientious objector. Under Title VII, it is illegal for an employer or labor organization to discriminate against someone on the basis of religion. Workers who feel that supporting their union conflicts with their religious beliefs have the ability to withhold the full amount of their dues. In most cases workers will need to give the equivalent amount to a mutually agreed-upon charity.

 

Some unions, like the Taylor Federation of Teachers, extended their contracts before right-to-work went into effect. The union and the Taylor School District went so far as to sign a separate 10-year security clause that will force members to financially support the union through 2023. As a result, the Taylor teachers and Michigan union members in contracts which predate right-to-work are like the other 26 forced unionism states in the country where a worker can be fired for not paying dues. (The Mackinac Center Legal Foundation is currently representing three teachers in Taylor who have sued their union and school district over the extension.)

 

Michigan labor law is in transition, but as more contracts expire or are modified, more workers have the freedom to fully decide if their union has earned their dues.

 

By: F. Vincent Vernuccio, director of labor policy and Christina Bolema, labor policy intern of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy in Midland, MI. Reprinted by permission.

 

Wetlands Reform Signed Into Law

 

Legislation that will continue Michigan's legacy of guarding its natural resources while encouraging responsible economic and agricultural development has been signed into law by Gov. Rick Snyder, said sponsor state Sen. Mike Green.

 

"The reforms in Public Act 98 of 2013 will guarantee that Michigan continues to be one of only two states in the nation that operates its own wetlands regulation program independent of the federal Environmental Protection Agency," said Green, R-Mayville. "As a state, we have been doing this since 1984. The reforms bring Michigan in line with requirements of the federal Clean Water Act while preserving the efficiency, responsiveness and pro-jobs approach that only local control can offer."

 

Under federal law, the EPA is responsible for regulating activities impacting air and water quality, including wetlands, but Michigan received a waiver in 1984 to operate its own program as long as it complied with CWA requirements. New Jersey is the only other state to also receive such a waiver. In 2008, the EPA issued a determination that Michigan's program violated federal law in several areas and ordered the state to be in compliance. Failure to do so wouldhave resulted in federal regulators based in Chicago assuming control.

 

"The average time it takes for someone to receive a wetlands-related permit from the state DEQ is 21 days. The national average from the EPA for other states is over 9 months," commented Green. "The need for the bill is obvious. If Michigan were to lose its independence on wetlands, the consequences and costs for Michigan job creators, farmers, local government and property owners would be devastating and could derail our state's economic comeback, while doing nothing more to protect our natural resources."

 

Green emphasized that the bill achieves a responsible balance among the needs to protect wetlands, property rights and lawful commerce. House Majority Floor Leader Jim Stamas, who also worked on the reforms for nearly two years, agreed.

 

"One of my top priorities since I took office was to make these changes to Michigan's wetlands program, and I am pleased that Sen. Green's bill has accomplished that goal," said Stamas, R-Midland. "PA 98 makes the wetlands program more effective and efficient and protects property owners' rights, and I am happy that it is now law.

 

The legislation was crafted over years of negotiations involving stakeholders from every facet of the issue. In the end, the bill was supported by Associated Builders and Contractors, Michigan and Detroit Chambers of Commerce, Michigan Farm Bureau, Michigan Association of County Drain Commissioners, major utilities, homebuilders, realtors and County Road Association of Michigan.