House, Senate Hold Hearings on Paycheck Deception Bills
Written by Jonathan Shorman
Apr. 04
news-leader.com
JEFFERSON CITY — Both the Senate and House held hearings Wednesday on so-called paycheck protection bills, but a Springfield lawmaker’s bill is likely dead on arrival in the Senate.
The Senate Governmental Accountability and Fiscal Oversight Committee considered House Bill 64, sponsored by Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Springfield.
Burlison’s bill applies to all unions and would require employees to authorize annually in writing contributions to union political action committees or the use of union dues for political purposes. The bill does exempt first responders, however.
On March 14, the Senate approved Senate Bill 29, a different union-related measure. That bill, sponsored by Sen. Dan Brown, R-Rolla, also requires annual written consent from employees when fees or dues go to political purposes.
Brown goes further than Burlison in that his bill requires annual written consent for deduction of any fees or union dues.
In addition, Brown’s bill only applies to public employees; Burlison’s bill applies to both private and public employees.
The Senate has already shown it is not interested in a paycheck bill applying to the private sector. During debate on Brown’s bill, an amendment to expand the scope of the legislation to include private-sector unions was voted down 31-1.
A House committee considered Brown’s bill Wednesday morning. Brown told the committee the requirements in his bill likely would not be constitutional for private-sector unions.
“I don’t think you can tell private labor unions what they can and cannot do,” Brown said.
Both bills provide some type of exemption for first responders. Rep. Kevin McManus, D-Kansas City, asked Brown if first responders had been exempted for political purposes in order to get the bill passed.
“That’s a lot of it,” Brown replied, drawing murmurs from the audience, which mostly included opponents of the bill.
Brown warned the representatives against changing the bill.
“I don’t think much of a change will make it through the Senate,” Brown said.
Senate Democrats filibustered for several hours in early March, until amendments were offered to soften the language in the bill. Democrats still voted against the bill but ended their filibuster.
Friday, April 5, 2013
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Proposed downsizing of Columbia mail facility faces strong opposition
Wait...so the postal service will save money by sending my mail to St. Louis or Kansas City, where it will be processed and sent back to the address I mailed it to in Columbia or Jeff City. Which means the letter I mail will take 3 days to get there, instead of arriving the next day. There must be a smarter alternative.
Columbia Missourian
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 | 11:46 p.m. CDT; updated 10:54 a.m. CDT, Wednesday, April 3, 2013
BY CHRISTI WARREN
COLUMBIA — The path along Interstate 70 Drive was lined with people in yellow and orange neon shirts handing out flyers and holding posters with slogans such as “Save the Mid-Mo Mail Facility” and “You've Got Mail, For Now.” They waved as people honked and cheered out of car windows on their way into a public hearing Tuesday night that addressed the U.S. Postal Service's plan to eliminate 42 of 133 jobs at the Columbia mail processing center.
About 120 people gathered at the Holiday Inn Executive Center to call for a stop to the proposed cuts. Among them was Kent Nichols, 59, who has worked for the Postal Service for almost 40 years. He's a clerk in the Columbia processing center.
“I've seen this consolidation stuff almost 40 years ago,” he said through tears, his shaking hands gripping the microphone. “It didn't work…You're trying to put a Band-Aid on a head wound that's gushing blood.”
The downsizing of processing facilities is one of the Postal Service's proposed solutions to an overall decline in mail volume of 53 billion pieces since 2006.
“The Postal Service is responding to a changing marketplace,” said David Martin, district manager for the Gateway District. “Put simply, to process less mail, we need fewer facilities.”
The cuts at the Columbia facility would save the post office $4.15 million annually, according to the Area Mail Processing study released March 15.
In 2006, the Postal Service operated 673 processing facilities. By 2013, the goal was to reduce that number to fewer than 200, according to Postal Service figures.
The Columbia center processes mail from all over mid-Missouri, reaching north to the Iowa border and south to Camdenton, along the Lake of the Ozarks, according to Jim Marsden, a 27-year-employee of the Postal Service and president of the Central Missouri chapter of the American Postal Workers Union.
“This affects more than the 42 impacted employees,” Marsden said. “It affects everyone who receives mail.”
The proposed downsizing of the facility will result in local mail being rerouted to St. Louis and Kansas City for processing, a worry for many at the meeting.
“We refer to mail going to St. Louis as going to the black hole,” Jeff Grimes, General Manager of the Centralia Fireside Gazette said.
The rerouting will result in a change of service from Columbia's current single-day service to two- to three-day service.
The 42 employees who stand to lose their place at the Columbia facility said they face stress and worry about what the proposed relocation will bring. It's especially worrisome for families, though Marsden questions the feasibility of relocation, citing a clause in their contracts that says employees can't be relocated farther than 50 miles from their current facility.
Reba Newman, a 38-year old Columbia resident, has been a clerk in the facility for six years.
"It's an uncomfortable feeling," she said. "I've lost my job before. We're fine now, but it puts a strain on the family, and I don't think they realize that."
Newman came to the meeting with her fiancé, Ricky Newman; daughter, Rickesha, 17; and son, Ricky Jr., 8.
Ricky Newman and Ricky Jr., shared a bag of candy during the meeting, while Reba Newman followed the proceedings, captivated.
“People don't understand,” Ricky Newman said. “They don't understand that business is leaving entirely… they aren't seeing the drastic picture.”
Columbia Missourian
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 | 11:46 p.m. CDT; updated 10:54 a.m. CDT, Wednesday, April 3, 2013
BY CHRISTI WARREN
COLUMBIA — The path along Interstate 70 Drive was lined with people in yellow and orange neon shirts handing out flyers and holding posters with slogans such as “Save the Mid-Mo Mail Facility” and “You've Got Mail, For Now.” They waved as people honked and cheered out of car windows on their way into a public hearing Tuesday night that addressed the U.S. Postal Service's plan to eliminate 42 of 133 jobs at the Columbia mail processing center.
About 120 people gathered at the Holiday Inn Executive Center to call for a stop to the proposed cuts. Among them was Kent Nichols, 59, who has worked for the Postal Service for almost 40 years. He's a clerk in the Columbia processing center.
“I've seen this consolidation stuff almost 40 years ago,” he said through tears, his shaking hands gripping the microphone. “It didn't work…You're trying to put a Band-Aid on a head wound that's gushing blood.”
The downsizing of processing facilities is one of the Postal Service's proposed solutions to an overall decline in mail volume of 53 billion pieces since 2006.
“The Postal Service is responding to a changing marketplace,” said David Martin, district manager for the Gateway District. “Put simply, to process less mail, we need fewer facilities.”
The cuts at the Columbia facility would save the post office $4.15 million annually, according to the Area Mail Processing study released March 15.
In 2006, the Postal Service operated 673 processing facilities. By 2013, the goal was to reduce that number to fewer than 200, according to Postal Service figures.
The Columbia center processes mail from all over mid-Missouri, reaching north to the Iowa border and south to Camdenton, along the Lake of the Ozarks, according to Jim Marsden, a 27-year-employee of the Postal Service and president of the Central Missouri chapter of the American Postal Workers Union.
“This affects more than the 42 impacted employees,” Marsden said. “It affects everyone who receives mail.”
The proposed downsizing of the facility will result in local mail being rerouted to St. Louis and Kansas City for processing, a worry for many at the meeting.
“We refer to mail going to St. Louis as going to the black hole,” Jeff Grimes, General Manager of the Centralia Fireside Gazette said.
The rerouting will result in a change of service from Columbia's current single-day service to two- to three-day service.
The 42 employees who stand to lose their place at the Columbia facility said they face stress and worry about what the proposed relocation will bring. It's especially worrisome for families, though Marsden questions the feasibility of relocation, citing a clause in their contracts that says employees can't be relocated farther than 50 miles from their current facility.
Reba Newman, a 38-year old Columbia resident, has been a clerk in the facility for six years.
"It's an uncomfortable feeling," she said. "I've lost my job before. We're fine now, but it puts a strain on the family, and I don't think they realize that."
Newman came to the meeting with her fiancé, Ricky Newman; daughter, Rickesha, 17; and son, Ricky Jr., 8.
Ricky Newman and Ricky Jr., shared a bag of candy during the meeting, while Reba Newman followed the proceedings, captivated.
“People don't understand,” Ricky Newman said. “They don't understand that business is leaving entirely… they aren't seeing the drastic picture.”
Friday, March 29, 2013
Union workers lobby lawmakers against paycheck bill
Missouri Times
By Collin Reischman
http://themissouritimes.com/1915/union-workers-lobby-lawmakers-against-paycheck-bill/
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — Union workers rallied Wednesday against legislation that seeks to limit union rights.
Brooks Sunkett, vice president of the Communication Workers of America, called pending “right to work” legislation an “assault on workers,” and an “all out attack on working families.”
During the rally, the crowd began to chant “Stand Up, Fight Back,” as speakers warned of increasingly “anti-worker” legislation that could weaken unions and lower wages. Attendees at the rally vowed to voice their concerns to their elected officials as well as rally their local communities about politicians who support anti-worker legislation. “Right to work,” prevailing wage changes, and “paycheck protection” were all mentioned as “radical” bills written by “radical” politicians.
Members of the United Auto Workers were busy during the legislative spring break. Representatives from the UAW spent the break knocking on doors, cold-calling, and meeting with their communities to talk about Senate Bill 29, which passed through the Senate just before the break.
SB 29, which supporters call “Paycheck Protection,” would change the way union fees are deducted from public employee paychecks.
UAW workers from the General Motors plant in Wentzville brought a large postcard with more than 100 signatures opposing SB29. The postcard was to be delivered to the office of Senate President Pro Tem Tom Dempsey, but also includes a reference to Sen. Scott Rupp, R-Wentzville. Both Senators have more than 1,300 UAW workers in their district, according David Hurst, president of the Greater Saint Louis UAW Cap Council.
“We want them to understand that we don’t approve of their votes on SB 29,” Hurst said. “They were on break, but we weren’t, we were out talking to our members and getting our message out there.”
Mile Melson, a UAW worker from the Wentzville plant, said “anti-worker” legislation of any kind of was a problem, and called SB 29 a “downgrade” for unions everywhere.
Midwest field communications director for the AFL-CIO Cathy Sherwin said private sector unions would come out in full support of the public sector unions affected by SB 29.
“An attack on one of us is an attack on all of us,” she said.
Other Stories You Might Enjoy:
Proposed Paycheck Legislation Sparks Union Debate Jefferson City, MO — The Senate Committee on Governmental Accountability and Fiscal Oversight held it’s ...
Paycheck protection bill yields contentious Senate debate By Collin Reischman Jefferson City, Mo. — Perhaps one of the most contentious floor debate yet ...
House, Senate pass similar “paycheck protection” By Collin Reischman JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — Legislation that would change the way union fees are ...
Letter to the Editor: Labor stands-up for working families Paycheck deception and Right-to-Work legislation threatens to take away the voices of working families at ...
Senate gives first round approval to ‘paycheck… By Eli Yokley JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- State Senate Democrats were able to stall passage of ...
By Collin Reischman
http://themissouritimes.com/1915/union-workers-lobby-lawmakers-against-paycheck-bill/
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — Union workers rallied Wednesday against legislation that seeks to limit union rights.
Brooks Sunkett, vice president of the Communication Workers of America, called pending “right to work” legislation an “assault on workers,” and an “all out attack on working families.”
During the rally, the crowd began to chant “Stand Up, Fight Back,” as speakers warned of increasingly “anti-worker” legislation that could weaken unions and lower wages. Attendees at the rally vowed to voice their concerns to their elected officials as well as rally their local communities about politicians who support anti-worker legislation. “Right to work,” prevailing wage changes, and “paycheck protection” were all mentioned as “radical” bills written by “radical” politicians.
Members of the United Auto Workers were busy during the legislative spring break. Representatives from the UAW spent the break knocking on doors, cold-calling, and meeting with their communities to talk about Senate Bill 29, which passed through the Senate just before the break.
SB 29, which supporters call “Paycheck Protection,” would change the way union fees are deducted from public employee paychecks.
UAW workers from the General Motors plant in Wentzville brought a large postcard with more than 100 signatures opposing SB29. The postcard was to be delivered to the office of Senate President Pro Tem Tom Dempsey, but also includes a reference to Sen. Scott Rupp, R-Wentzville. Both Senators have more than 1,300 UAW workers in their district, according David Hurst, president of the Greater Saint Louis UAW Cap Council.
“We want them to understand that we don’t approve of their votes on SB 29,” Hurst said. “They were on break, but we weren’t, we were out talking to our members and getting our message out there.”
Mile Melson, a UAW worker from the Wentzville plant, said “anti-worker” legislation of any kind of was a problem, and called SB 29 a “downgrade” for unions everywhere.
Midwest field communications director for the AFL-CIO Cathy Sherwin said private sector unions would come out in full support of the public sector unions affected by SB 29.
“An attack on one of us is an attack on all of us,” she said.
Other Stories You Might Enjoy:
Proposed Paycheck Legislation Sparks Union Debate Jefferson City, MO — The Senate Committee on Governmental Accountability and Fiscal Oversight held it’s ...
Paycheck protection bill yields contentious Senate debate By Collin Reischman Jefferson City, Mo. — Perhaps one of the most contentious floor debate yet ...
House, Senate pass similar “paycheck protection” By Collin Reischman JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — Legislation that would change the way union fees are ...
Letter to the Editor: Labor stands-up for working families Paycheck deception and Right-to-Work legislation threatens to take away the voices of working families at ...
Senate gives first round approval to ‘paycheck… By Eli Yokley JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- State Senate Democrats were able to stall passage of ...
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
Group Wants Senator To Stand Up Against Reductions In Union Rights
From Fox 2 News, St. Louis.
Posted on: 5:59 pm, March 21, 2013, by Betsey Bruce
View video here: http://fox2now.com/2013/03/21/group-wants-senator-to-stand-up-against-reductions-in-union-rights/
KIRKWOOD, MO (KTVI)– Union members upset with so called “Pay Check Protection” and “Right To Work” legislation protested in Kirkwood Thursday.
A group of current and retired union members gathered outside state senator Eric Schmitt’s district office hoping to meet with him. They want him to stand up against reductions in union rights.
Senate Bill 29 would require public employee unions to get written consent from members before deducting fees to run the union or to be used for political purposes.
Supporters call it “Paycheck Protection.”
Larger labor organizations like the St. Louis Building and Construction Trades Council, praise Republican Schmitt for working to spur more job production.
All of labor is concerned about “Right To Work” legislation.
Missouri lawmakers will be back to work next week
Posted on: 5:59 pm, March 21, 2013, by Betsey Bruce
View video here: http://fox2now.com/2013/03/21/group-wants-senator-to-stand-up-against-reductions-in-union-rights/
KIRKWOOD, MO (KTVI)– Union members upset with so called “Pay Check Protection” and “Right To Work” legislation protested in Kirkwood Thursday.
A group of current and retired union members gathered outside state senator Eric Schmitt’s district office hoping to meet with him. They want him to stand up against reductions in union rights.
Senate Bill 29 would require public employee unions to get written consent from members before deducting fees to run the union or to be used for political purposes.
Supporters call it “Paycheck Protection.”
Larger labor organizations like the St. Louis Building and Construction Trades Council, praise Republican Schmitt for working to spur more job production.
All of labor is concerned about “Right To Work” legislation.
Missouri lawmakers will be back to work next week
Workers tells it like it is - Lege is anti-worker
This letter to the editor printed in the Springfield News Leaders is short and right on point.
Paycheck protection bill: Measure hurts unions, working families
Mar 25, 2013
Written by
Audra Dickens
Fair Grove
As a public employee, I’m appalled at our state Senate and House for passing a so-called paycheck protection bill.
It’s an unnecessary bill, a waste of taxpayers’ money, and nothing more than an attack on unions and working families.
The paycheck deception bill aims to strip away public sector workers’ right to choose whether or not to have union dues automatically deducted from their paychecks, and it would infringe on these workers’ freedom of speech by making contributing to a political fund more difficult.
Why are our legislators more interested in taking away union members’ rights than in actually improving Missouri’s economy? Why are they trying to burden workers and undermine unions instead of creating jobs and improving our economy?
Missouri’s legislative leaders should be working to improve schools, make our communities safer and increase economic opportunity. Instead, they’re carrying out a corporate agenda that hurts our middle class and puts working families at risk.
Paycheck protection bill: Measure hurts unions, working families
Mar 25, 2013
Written by
Audra Dickens
Fair Grove
As a public employee, I’m appalled at our state Senate and House for passing a so-called paycheck protection bill.
It’s an unnecessary bill, a waste of taxpayers’ money, and nothing more than an attack on unions and working families.
The paycheck deception bill aims to strip away public sector workers’ right to choose whether or not to have union dues automatically deducted from their paychecks, and it would infringe on these workers’ freedom of speech by making contributing to a political fund more difficult.
Why are our legislators more interested in taking away union members’ rights than in actually improving Missouri’s economy? Why are they trying to burden workers and undermine unions instead of creating jobs and improving our economy?
Missouri’s legislative leaders should be working to improve schools, make our communities safer and increase economic opportunity. Instead, they’re carrying out a corporate agenda that hurts our middle class and puts working families at risk.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)