Two seemingly unrelated union drives – for deputy state’s attorneys and child-care workers – have been finally laid to rest for another year, to the frustration of some senators and advocates.
As the legislative session wound down, the two bills came close to merging as advocates for child-care workers considered attaching their language to an already faltering effort to unionize deputy state’s attorneys.
“We were looking out for anything that looked like a suitable vehicle,” said American Federation of Teachers Vermont President Ben Johnson, speaking after a failed attempt last week to tack child-care union language onto a miscellaneous education bill.
Johnson, a key player in a three-year push to unionize child-care workers, said the tactics adopted by opponents of the legislation led him to look for almost any avenue promising passage this year.
Sen. Dick McCormack, D-Windsor, a champion of child-care worker unions, said he considered fusing the two union bills last week but decided against it, fearing he would alienate some of his support in the Senate.
“There’s a point at which you just have to sniff the wind, and say: I’m likely to start alienating potential supporters by even appearing, in some people’s eyes, to be behaving badly. So we’ll take this up next year,” McCormack said.
Sen. Dick McCormack, D-Windsor
In the meantime, the push to unionize deputy state’s attorneys has been ordered to lie for a year to accommodate results from a study of caseloads for attorneys representing the state.
Combining those child-care and state prosecutor unions into one bill would have caused problems, said Sen. Phil Baruth, D-Chittenden. But he added that legislation about deputy state’s attorneys had been delayed primarily to incorporate that study, which is slated for release later this year.
Sen. Kevin Mullin, R-Rutland, a critic of child-care unionization, voted for state prosecutor unions in the Economic Development Committee, which he chairs. He said deputy state’s attorneys are legitimate government employees, while child-care workers are often small business owners.
Mullin said an attempt to combine the two bills wouldn’t place senators who hold differing views on the two drives in an uncomfortable position. Instead, he said the tactics reflected poorly on disputes between labor groups.
“Labor put labor in an uncomfortable position,” he said. “They could’ve made a clear statement that we’re not going to interfere with our brothers and sisters who are trying to unionize, but they didn’t.”
Mullin also said that there hadn’t been any deal struck between McCormack and himself to allow a Senate floor vote solely on the issue of child-care unions.
“If he found a legitimate avenue to place it on, then that would be fine, but I was still going to fight it as strenuously as I could,” Mullin said. “It wasn’t germane to the bill that he found.
“I was never happy with having a bill referred to my committee, and spending over three weeks on it, and then having another committee try to basically take up the subject again. I don’t think any committee chair in the building is going to be happy about that,” he said.
The Vermont State Employees Association has lobbied hard this year to allow deputy state’s attorneys a chance to negotiate pay and working conditions.
VSEA lobbyist Steve Howard said he suspected the close timing – specifically the fact that the bill wouldn’t clear the House this session – was a larger factor in delaying his bill for a year, than the possibility of a child-care union debate interrupting proceedings.
But he added: “I think it’d be reasonable to assume that that might be something someone would do. I mean, it’s a vehicle, it’s on the floor, and it’s germane … I can understand why someone would do that.”
Howard declined to comment on whether attaching child-care union language could have jeopardized his union’s push, and wouldn’t say how his union would have reacted.
VSEA lobbyist and former state Sen. Vince Illuzzi said he doesn’t blame the AFT for “trying every opportunity” to pass the bill, noting that they’ve been trying for years.
“We didn’t stand in the way of the AFT,” said Illuzzi. “I certainly understand they’re trying to help a group of workers in the state, while we’re trying to help a different group. That’s just the reality of it.
“On the other hand, I know there are members who’ll vote for the deputy state’s attorneys bill and not vote for the child-care bill, but that’s a bit outside our control,” he said. Illuzzi, who is also Essex County state’s attorney, started out as a deputy state’s attorney in 1979, a time he described as a “different era.”
Illuzzi described “extremely busy” deputy prosecutors as the workhorses of the criminal justice system, processing criminal cases, juvenile cases, search warrants and other legal dockets, adding up to a heavy workload.
He believes there is general recognition among lawmakers that more attention needs to be given to these approximately 100 employees, who include victim’s advocates and administrative assistants working with deputy prosecutors.
As for child-care unionization, you can rest assured that it will be back again next year, Johnson said. His pledge marks the continuation of an ongoing political drama, marked last year by a dispute with Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell, and complaints that McCormack abused the amendment process, by grafting his language onto even remotely relevant bills.
Gov. Peter Shumlin lent his weight to the child-care unionization drive late in 2012 and earlier this year.
But Johnson argued that opponents of unionization, too, have perverted the political process and betrayed promises in an effort to stall the legislation and prevent a simple vote.
“All session long we followed the path that we were given,” Johnson said. “We were asked to be quiet and to be good little boys and girls and not raise a ruckus over all the energy that’s been put out to keep us from a [floor] vote on our bill.
“We kept our end of the bargain; McCormack kept his end. We’d have a debate on the floor, and a clean shot, up or down on the floor,” he continued.
“As soon as our opponents realized they’d lose the vote, they had to go back on that deal, and challenge it on an extremely far-fetched technicality,” he said, referring to Mullin’s argument last week that child-care unionization isn’t germane to miscellaneous education provisions, because child-care providers aren’t certified by the state to offer early education.
“In order to stop the bill from passing, they have to stop it from reaching the floor,” Johnson said. “They know they will lose the vote on the floor, and they have to stop that vote. It would not surprise me in the least if I heard that our opponents in the Senate would stop deputy state’s attorneys from organizing, just on the off-chance that it’d lead to a floor vote on child-care unions.”
As for the tone of the debate next year, Johnson made no promises to play nice.
“We would be fools not to assume that every procedural tactic that could be conceivably used, or abused, against us, will be so used,” Johnson said. “We’d be foolish not to expect that. And we’d be foolish to believe, twice in a row, that if we follow the rules and play nice, that we’ll get a fair hearing.”
Speaking for the VSEA, Howard said he was disappointed about the delay in unionizing deputy state’s attorneys and also said the issue will return next year.