|
 Hundreds of workers in Palatine-area
District 15 – including school nurses, sign language interpreters and others –
walked out on strike on Oct. 16.
Now the union representing those workers claims the striking workers should
still be receiving health care benefits courtesy of the district. In other
words, the union wants the right to strike, but it doesn’t want any of the
repercussions.
But that isn’t how the law works in Illinois. And if the union failed to alert
its members of the risks of going on strike, the blame falls on the union.
The union left parents and students in the lurch
More than 12,000 elementary students in Palatine-area District 15 were left
without school nurses, sign language interpreters and other important school
workers on Oct. 16.
That’s because the Educational Support Personnel Association, or ESPA, which
represents 454 workers in the district, walked out on strike.
 Since then, a Cook County judge ordered some of the striking Palatine Township
Elementary District 15 support workers to return to work immediately. The judge
ruled the absence of 168 of the more than 450 workers on strike constituted a
public safety risk, and thus those 168 workers did not have the power to strike
under Illinois’ Educational Labor Relations Act.
But the remaining workers are still on strike.
Union power already stacks the deck against Illinoisans
The ability to strike is a powerful tool. When a government worker union in
Illinois doesn’t get its way in negotiations, it can threaten to shut down state
and local governments or schools – and the services residents need and pay for
through tax dollars – in order to have its demands met.
Residents have no similar tools.
A school district union can walk out on parents and students – but the parents
and students can do nothing about it.
A state worker union can walk out on children and families counting on
government services – but those children and families can do nothing about it.
That means government worker unions hold a disproportionate share of the power
when it comes to negotiations. They can make demands and walk out if those
demands are not met.
[to top of second column] |
As demonstrated by
what’s going on in District 15, that leaves residents’ day-to-day
lives – and the ability to utilize government services – under the
control of government worker unions.
Significantly, none of
Illinois’ neighbors give that sort of power to unions. In Wisconsin,
Iowa, Missouri, Kentucky, Indiana and Michigan, most or all
government workers are prohibited from going on strike.
Illinois stands alone in the region as the only state giving an
affirmative right to government workers to walk out on the job.
The union wants even more power and no risks
Going on strike is not without short- and long-term risks for
workers.
In the short term, union members who go on strike are out of work –
and unpaid – for an indefinite period of time.
But lost wages aren’t the only thing at risk. A government employer
– such as District 15 – is not bound to continue providing its
portion of employees’ benefits. As reported by the Chicago Tribune,
the district claims it communicated to workers before the strike
that walking out could result in a loss of salary and benefits.
In the long term, a striking worker may not have a job to return to
once the strike is over. Under Illinois law, the employer is free to
replace striking workers. The striking workers will not
automatically get their jobs back once the strike is over. If there
is no appropriate vacancy in an employee’s job category, he or she
could be out of work indefinitely.
If workers were guaranteed salary and benefits while on strike and
their same jobs back on return, the public would be at the complete
whim of government worker unions at all times. Unions could call
strikes without repercussions for workers, while inflicting great
harm on residents.
Now the ESPA appears to want even more power. It wants the right to
strike while still receiving benefits.
If the union misled its members into thinking they could go on
strike and maintain all benefits, the fault lies with the union for
failing to inform its members of the risks.
Click here to respond to the editor about this article |
