Elizabeth New (Hovde) says ‘it’s past time to bring these salary negotiations out of the dark’
Elizabeth New (Hovde)
Washington Policy Center
The Washington Federation of State Employees is urging more than 50,000 public employees to stage a walkout Sept. 10. The call to action is to protest compensation proposals that union leaders call “short-sighted and disrespectful.”
The appropriateness and legality of public employee walkouts and strikes aside, it’d be great if taxpayers knew what “short-sighted and disrespectful” was. We don’t. And that “we” includes state workers who are being told they are being disrespected and urged to get theatrical. That’s short-sighted.
Since 2004, state negotiations with union executives about how much taxpayers compensate government employees have been allowed to be done in secret, even though these secret talks with the governor’s office involve hundreds of millions of dollars in public spending per biennium. Before 2004, compensation decisions were made publicly, with an opportunity for comment in public hearings and as part of the normal legislative budget process where lawmakers weigh budget priorities. That’s as it should be.
In a video for state workers, WFSE leaders tell public employees that they can’t share precise details of what’s happening with current pay talks until a tentative agreement has been reached, implying that they are being forbidden from doing so. Ashley Fueston, council vice president, said, “The way that our bargaining structure works here in the state of Washington, we aren’t actually allowed to share the details of what’s happening within bargaining.”
What Fueston doesn’t say is that secrecy is something unions want and have fought to ensure. Keeping taxpayers and employees in the dark allows them to get away with saying things like a compensation offer is short-sighted and disrespectful.
Next to nothing?
Among other accusations that go unbacked by any details or numbers, the union says public employees are “being offered next to nothing” and that the state “has proposed what amounts to a pay cut.” Given the widespread smearing, state officials and lawmakers should want negotiations in plain sight.
Without being able to see what is offered to public employees, taxpayers and WFSE members cannot decide what they think for themselves. With inflation, much of it government-caused, many workers of all stripes feel like pay increases have them no further ahead. That might allow WFSE to get away with some of their assertions. Then again, the union makes it sound like its pay request and the state’s proposal is far apart.
People can and should be able to determine for themselves which party is being ridiculous. They should also be privy to how many taxpayer dollars are being volleyed about, especially when accompanying this pay plot is the state’s June revenue forecast. It predicts a $500 million drop in projected tax collections for the upcoming budget cycle.
The Washington State Standard quotes David Schumacher, the director of the Office of Financial Management, saying, “We anticipate limited revenue in the upcoming biennium.” He continued, “Just as we’ve asked state agencies to limit new programs and request only essential funding, we are applying the same principle to our negotiations.”
While defiantly saying of pay increases offered to state employees, “We won’t accept it,” WFSE members should be demanding their leaders give them the full picture before asking them to throw a temper tantrum at work. It’s past time to bring these salary negotiations out of the dark.
Elizabeth New (Hovde) is a policy analyst and the director of the Centers for Health Care and Worker Rights at the Washington Policy Center. She is a Clark County resident.
Also read:
- Opinion: Is government greed fueling the drive to defeat citizen-led ballot initiatives?
Paul Guppy of the Washington Policy Center discusses how government greed may be fueling opposition to citizen-led ballot initiatives aimed at reducing new taxes in Washington state. - Opinion: WA Cares commission weighs in on how future recipients will be allowed to spend moneyElizabeth New (Hovde) from the Washington Policy Center discusses the ongoing challenges with WA Cares, highlighting solvency concerns and the impact of Initiative 2124 on the program’s future.
- POLL: If Tri-Mountain Golf Course were sold, how would you feel about it being developed into something else?Poll: How do you feel about the potential sale and development of Tri-Mountain Golf Course? Share your thoughts on this community issue!
- Opinion: Fact check – Will repealing Washington’s CO2 tax harm ‘roads and bridges?’Todd Myers of the Washington Policy Center says legislators and activists understand that residents want to improve the safety and efficiency of our transportation system Todd MyersWashington Policy Center One of the primary arguments made by supporters of Washington’s tax on CO2 emissions, called the Climate Commitment Act (CCA), is that if the state loses …
- Opinion: Turn signals in parking lotsDoug Dahl of Target Zero answers whether turn signals are required in parking lots, explaining their importance for safety and courtesy.
