If you want
to get this
newsletter
via email...

The Washington State Labor Council's
 pretty-much-weekly report on the 2004 session

See previous editions

Special update (2-12): Senate OKs across-the-board benefit cuts for injured workers
Special update (2-11): Senate passes minimum wage freeze, R&D tax breaks
Special update (2-10): Senate votes imminent on bad workers' comp, wage bills

---

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 6   (PDF version)
The politics of workers' comp

A week ago today, thousands of building trades workers rallied at the Capitol to remind legislators they are watching, and they are still angry about last year's $200-million-a-year cut in unemployment benefits that disproportionately hurts them. Today, instead of discussing what can be done to mitigate that harm, the Senate is considering some salt for those wounds.

SB 5378 is the poster child for business-backed efforts to gut the workers' compensation system. This bill, which passed the Senate on party lines last year but died in the House, would cut injured workers' benefits across the board, similar to last year's unemployment benefit cuts, through four-quarter averaging rather than using wage-of-injury to determine time loss. It also overturns the Cockle court decision that the value of health benefits must be included in calculating benefits, and nixes the Avundez decision that says the state cannot presume certain workers, such as agricultural workers, are seasonal.

(See last week's Update for a listing of some of the other anti-worker workers' comp bills alive in the Senate.)

In pursuing this contentious agenda, some Senators are ignoring labor's good-faith offer to take a critical look at the workers' compensation system via the governor's new business-labor process.  Gov. Locke has made a commitment that he won't sign any workers' comp legislation this year unless it's agreed to by both business and labor.  The House Commerce and Labor Committee, under the strong chairmanship of Rep. Steve Conway (D-Tacoma), hasn't moved any of the business-vs.-labor bills, but is open to business-and-labor bills.

So what's the point?  Apparently, to force political votes that can be used this fall to mischaracterize State Senators' commitment to Making Washington More Competitive™.

Well -- just as the construction workers said last week -- we are watching, too.  Votes in favor of these doomed-from-the-get-go bills will be considered anti-labor votes on the Legislative Voting Records distributed to rank-and-file union members statewide this fall.  And all "moderate" Democrats should think long-and-hard about whether boosting their business voting record a few points will make a hill o' beans difference this fall when the increasingly partisan business associations identify Republican challengers for their districts.

(See our post-2002 election report, Big business’ anonymous hit pieces target state's Democrats , for a refresher on what will happen again in 2004.)

The good news announced from the podium at last week's building trades rally was that the House passed HB 2439 by a 54-44 vote. This bill promotes job training and apprenticeship by requiring that at least 15% of labor hours on major public works projects be performed by apprentices. This rule is already in place under the governor's 2000 executive order. HB 2439 would put it into statute, and the WSLC urges its passage in the Senate.

Which businesses are taxpayers subsidizing?

There is great momentum for the idea of disclosing which private businesses taxpayers are subsidizing through tax breaks. 

Last Friday, the House passed a "compromise" measure to extend the high-tech R&D tax breaks.  Although it includes some steps on disclosure and accountability, the WSLC maintains they are insufficient baby steps.  Under HB 2546, which passed on a 86-12 vote, firms that get the tax breaks must file reports disclosing how many employees they have, how many are in Washington, and the ranges of their wages and benefits. But those reports will be kept confidential as trade secrets.  Only the names of companies and the amount of tax breaks they receive will be public.

But what about taxpayers' right-to-know which companies they subsidize through the Basic Health Plan or Medicaid?  As we've previously reported (in the context of the Health Care for Washington Workers bill), companies like Wal-Mart have hundreds of employees on state-financed health plans because they don't offer employees affordable health benefits and they don't pay them enough to afford other health insurance.  Having taxpayer-subsidized health care gives the Wal-Marts of the world an unfair and counterproductive competitive advantage over retailers that do the right thing and offer affordable health care.

It would seem to be a no-brainer to ask BHP and Medicaid applicants who their employers are so the state -- and the rest of us -- have that knowledge.

But we don't ask. 

HB 3047 would fix that and start asking BHP and Medicaid enrollees where they work.  It was heard and passed by House Health Care this week, but was opposed by Reps. Barbara Bailey (R-Oak Harbor), Gary Alexander (R-Tumwater), Brad Benson (R-Spokane), Mary Skinner (R-Yakima) and newcomer Jay Rodne (R-Bellevue).  These legislators appear more concerned about protecting the anonymity of employers offering no benefits than in addressing the growing health care crisis in this state.

The WSLC calls on the House to pass this good government legislation.  It is not our legislators' job to protect businesses in this state from public criticism.  If businesses want tax breaks and subsidized health care, they can defend their use of them like big kids.  At the very least, the public has a right to know who they are.

TIFs also require disclosure, accountability

Speaking of taxpayers' right-to-know... 

HB 1281 is about something called Tax Increment Financing (TIF) districts.  TIFs are a tool the government uses to encourage development in communities where it might not otherwise happen by establishing districts that redirect newly generated property and sales tax revenues from local government and keep it in the district.  In other words, you get a tax break to create a new business there.

Last year, citizens' groups and labor organizations argued for an open public hearing process around TIFs, for community benefit agreements such as local hire agreements, company-specific reporting on jobs created and wages/benefits provided, plus public disclosure of all this information.  That way taxpayers can decide whether it works.

Some of these provisions were included in last year’s version of HB 1281 after numerous discussions with the governor’s office, prime sponsor Rep. Eric Pettigrew (D-Seattle) and other legislators, including those on the House Trade and Economic Development Committee.

But this year, the governor’s office has decided to ignore citizen and labor groups and to ignore the increasing demand for public accountability for tax subsidies.  The governor’s second substitute bill, P2SHB 1281 prime sponsored by Rep. Jim McIntire (D-Seattle), guts must of the protective provisions from last year.  It bypassed its committee of origin, going to the House Finance Committee just before cutoff.  Not much of an open public hearing process there!

When is our government going to realize that the public wants to know as much about how tax breaks are being used as they do about general fund spending?  TIFs have the character of transforming whole communities.  Are developers the only ones that are supposed to be in-the-know?  Surely the people picking up the slack for those subsidies deserve the same consideration.

The WSLC urges a "No" vote on this bill until the governor and legislature are willing to remove the cloak of secrecy from TIFs and talk with community and labor groups.

Your genetic privacy makes Job-Killer™ list

Currently, Washington is one of only four states that lack laws to protect you from discrimination based on genetic testing.  The WSLC supports two bills to address that.

SB 6180 would prohibit genetic screening as a condition of employment.  It is sponsored by Sen. Rosa Franklin (D-Tacoma), a longtime champion of this issue, and was heard and approved Friday by the Senate Commerce and Trade Committee.

HB 2772, sponsored by Rep. Shay Schual-Berke (D-Normandy Park), is a more comprehensive bill to prohibit genetic discrimination and protect our privacy by requiring informed consent for the disclosure of genetic information.  It was heard Wednesday but biotech industry lobbyists opposed the informed consent language because -- echoing a familiar argument from the debate over R&D tax breaks -- they say it would be too burdensome paperwork-wise on their research. 

That's the problem with America these days.  All these pesky "rights" are a big hassle for businesses.  They kill jobs and make us less competitive.

The WSLC calls on legislators to find a reasonable way -- like 46 other states have managed -- to protect Washington citizens from discrimination in employment and insurance based on predictive genetic markers for disease or illness.

"Genetic discrimination is unfair to workers and their families. It is unjustified. To deny employment or insurance to a healthy person based only on a predisposition violates our country’s belief in equal treatment and individual merit. Just as we have addressed discrimination based on race, gender and age, we must now prevent discrimination based on genetic information."

Who said that?  Some wacky labor lobbyist bent on making Washington less competitive in the biotech industry?  No.  It was President George W. Bush, when as Texas governor in 1997, he signed their law prohibiting genetic discrimination.

An effort to kill living wage ordinances

The Senate Commerce and Trade (But Not Labor) Committee today passed SB 6605 taking away the right of local governments in this state to enact municipal minimum wages or living wage ordinances like the one adopted by the City of Bellingham. These ordinances essentially set higher minimum wages for businesses that choose to contract with local governments. 

From Bellingham (where city contractors must pay at least $10 an hour or $11.50 if they don't provide health benefits) to San Francisco and Sante Fe (which both now have citywide minimum wages of $8.50), cities across the nation are passing higher minimum wages and living-wage ordinances.

That's why the American Legislative Exchange Council, yet another conservative business-funded organization that shops cookie-cutter bills to state legislatures, has offered up SB 6605.  Normally, these pro-privatization anti-government ALECologues would urge decentralization of government in favor of local control.  But apparently when the locals disagree with them, ideological exceptions can be made.

The WSLC urges rejection of SB 6605.

Today and Tuesday: The deadlines that aren't

Today is the deadline for bills to pass from their policy committee of origin, so literally hundreds of bills should die. The deadline for budget and tax bills is Tuesday.

But in Olympia, "dead" is a state of mind.  Bills that miss deadlines are still circling the drain right up until the final gavel goes down.  They can be resurrected in the form of amendments to other bills, or forced to the floor on a procedural vote. 

We'll keep you posted on what survived these "deadlines" next week.

---

PREVIOUS EDITIONS of the 2004 WSLC Legislative Update:

Jan. 27 -- We pay for Wal-Mart greed -- always (health care, workers' comp, R&D tax breaks)
Jan. 22 -- We're No. 1, which doesn't "suck"  (min. wage, R&D tax breaks, apprenticeship)
Jan. 16 -- R&D needs Reporting & Disclosure   (plus workers' comp, health care, and home care)

 

Copyright © 2004  Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO