Lack of Transparency, Threat of Arrests Continue to Cloud SEIU Unionization Scheme

/in , , /by

STATEMENT: November 21, 2013

The Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity calls on the Chafee Administration to provide transparency during the negotiating process with the 540 newly unionized childcare providers, as well as to hold them and SEIU to their word.
Amid reports that the SEIU has already requested that secret negotiations begin with the Administration, the Center points out, that immediately following the election to accept SEIU representation, union officials and new union members repeatedly told the public that unionization was about professional development and not about pay and benefit increases. The Center, on behalf of taxpayers who would pay for any negotiated benefits, urges the Administration to provide sunlight on the process, in order to demonstrate that the substance of the negotiations is, indeed, restricted to professional development matters only. Administration officials have already indicated that they are not inclined to allow any public scrutiny until after the negotiations are completed.
“After the most secretive and biased election process we have ever witnessed, it is unacceptable to taxpayers that these negotiations will take place in the shadows,” commented Mike Stenhouse, CEO for the Center. “The report our Center issued in September, Taxpayers Beware, discussed the potential costs associated with yet more union benefits, which our already stressed budget cannot responsibly absorb”.
In a related matter, as reported in The Ocean State Current, the State Police admitted that there would have been no justification to arrest taxpayer advocates for merely watching the proceedings of the child-care provider unionization election conducted by the State Labor Relations Board (SLRB), which violated its own guidelines in directing law enforcement officers to forcibly keep observers away. A number of citizen volunteers were threatened with arrest if they approached the election venues.”The entire SEIU unionization election scheme, orchestrated by the SLRB, reeks of insider cronyism, secrecy, and, now we know, unjustified heavy-handed tactics,” concluded Stenhouse.
.

STATEMENT: October 31, 2013

The Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity questions the results of the election results announced today by the State Labor Relations Board (SLRB) regarding the unionization of home childcare providers.
Many Rhode Islanders believe that this entire unionization and election scheme was rigged from the outset. With multiple allegations of fraud with similar votes in other states, the utter lack of transparency and degree of secrecy by the State Labor Relations Board provides zero assurance that a free and fair election was conducted. The disdain towards taxpayers and the public, the armed security, the threat of arrest of citizens, and the fact that union members were brought in to work the polls …  only perpetuate these concerns.
The alleged vote tally of 72% of all eligible voters in favor of unionization is at significant odds with results from many other states, and does not square with the counts that our volunteers reported from the poll venues.
It is in the interest of the unions to create the perception that overwhelming support was achieved so that they can claim they have a mandate to go after the next group they wish to unionize.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  October 27, 2013 

Center Condemns Heavy Handed Tactics and Secrecy of SEIU Unionization Election

The Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity condemns the heavy handed tactics that unnecessarily led to arrest threats against civilians merely attempting to observe the election to unionize home childcare providers on Saturday in Newport, Kingston, and Lincoln. The Center challenges the State Labor Relations Board (SLRB), the SEIU, and the State Police to follow existing rules and regulations.

“Imagine this: The insiders who colluded to bring this SEIU unionization scheme to a vote – the SLRB, the SEIU, and the State of Rhode Island – are allowed full access as officials of the election; yet the taxpayer, who will bear the cost of the election and the cost of unionization are not allowed anywhere near the polling place, under threat of arrest”, said Mike Stenhouse, CEO for the Center. “What are they so afraid of and why has this supposedly democratic process been kept so secret? Something is very wrong here.”

Volunteers organized by the Center who attempted to observe the proceedings were stopped by state troopers and presented with a copy of the SLRB’s General Rules and Regulations (Title 28, Labor and Labor Relations, Chapter 28-7 of the Labor Relations Act, Section 8.02.7 – Prohibited Election Conduct) that prohibits “electioneering” within 200 feet of the polling place or who may “interfere” with the election process.

“Absolutely no electioneering took place; no protests; no signs; no materials passed out; and no volunteer, in any way, attempted to interfere with the election process, yet they were threatened with arrest for just being in the vicinity. Meanwhile union supporters were allowed to wear their purple SEIU scarves all the way inside,” continued Stenhouse. “Since when does the State Police take orders from the SLRB?”

The Center calls upon the SLRB and the State Police to heed the law and allow peaceful civilian observation, specifically calling upon:

  • the SLRB and its administrator, Robyn Golden, to retract its self-serving, broad interpretation of its own rules and regulations
  • the SLRB to provide a full accounting of the costs of the election, and the names of the individuals it authorized to serve as “official observers”
  • the State Police to: a) conduct its own, independent interpretation of the regulations and instruct its troopers to act accordingly; namely taking action only if improper electioneering or interference takes place, and; b) to specify under what authority it can be deputized by the SLRB

 

ORIGINAL STATEMENT:  October 27, 2013 

The Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity openly questions the transparency of the scheme that could have significant consequence for taxpayers; namely the process to unionize home childcare providers, which culminates with an election in the next week about whether home child care providers will accept exclusive representation by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). The Center challenges the State Labor Relations Board (SLRB) and the SEIU to provide additional information to the public.

UnionfreelogoThe SLRB has refused to release information about the card signature process; has refused to consider multiple petitions from our Center; and refuses to provide any information to indicate that the upcoming voting process will be fair, transparent, or fraud-free with regard to voter validation, intimidation, and public access.

There is reason to be wary, as there have been allegations of SEIU fraud and intimidation tactics over similar schemes in other states (see SEIU California intimidation video), yet there are no publicly known safeguards in place here in Rhode Island. In Rhode Island, multiple providers have privately confided with the Center that SEIU representatives have lied to them when knocking on their doors to promote unionization.

Other providers, not eligible to vote, because they do not currently serve families on public assistance, feel discriminated against and have questioned the fairness of an election where their voice has been purposely suppressed. If they do accept such families in the future, these providers will be forced to pay dues or fees without ever having had the opportunity to vote on an issue that could significantly affect their business.

“There is real fear and frustration out there. Despite repeated requests from our Center, the silence from the SLRB has been deafening. If the SEIU and the SLRB are so convinced that they are conducting a fair process, why are they afraid of a little sunlight”, inquired Mike Stenhouse, CEO for the Center. “There has been no information about how the SLRB plans to ensure that voters will not be intimidated or deprived of free-choice in this election. We challenge them to publicly discuss these matters in order to ensure taxpayers and providers that an open and honest election will take place”.

Most egregiously, the SLRB has refused to acknowledge that recent U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Appeals Court actions, which raise the distinct possibility that similar schemes may be unconstitutional, should have any bearing on its plans to forge ahead with a vote, despite the legal and financial morass the election could create.

The secrecy began from the outset when the SEIU claimed it collected signed cards from 80% of the providers, allegedly indicating that they were in favor of unionization, and submitted those cards to the SLRB in order to begin the election process. Neither the cards themselves, their content, nor the names of the providers who the SEIU claims to have signed them, were provided to our Center or to the public, despite a specific request to the SLRB. Neither was any information provided about the validation process of the signatures, instead choosing to hide behind its own, self-serving rules designed to ensure secrecy. In an informal survey, when our Center called dozens of providers, not a single provider indicated that they signed a card. Proof of fraud? No. Statistically curious? Yes.

Next, our Center formally petitioned the SLRB three times to amend the election process to conform with precedents in other states and very recent federal court actions, specifically requesting:

  • a ballot language change that more accurately reflected the decision providers must make, as has been worded on other state ballots;
  • an open legal response and analysis to a September federal appeals court ruling blocking an almost identical election in Minnesota;
  • to postpone the election until after the U.S. Supreme Court, in October, agreed to hear an Illinois case that may provide legal precedent to the RI process

In all three cases, the petitions were denied, with the SLRB again hiding behind a supposed technicality that our Center, representing the taxpayer, had no standing to make such petitions. However, the SLRB cited no statute to validate this claim.

Finally, with regard to the SLRB’s “Notice of Election” sent to eligible providers, after repeated requests, now 12 days old, the SLRB has refused to respond in any way to a number of questions the Center posed about the election venues. The questions, specifically inquired about:

  • What the SLRB considers as “electioneering?
  • Voter validation process at the polls?
  • How the Center or the taxpayer can become an “authorized observer” at the polls? The state and the SEIU have already been designated as such.
  • Public and media access guidelines at the polling locations?

Since 2004, when the SLRB unilaterally attempted to designate independent child home care providers as state employees for the purpose of unionization, only to be struck down in 2005 in a RI Superior Court ruling, there can be no question that the SLRB and the SEIU are working closely together to critical elements of this unionization process hidden from public scrutiny.

Rhode Islanders should expect more from its government. Our Center demands transparency of this blatant insider scheme.

Statement: Mike Riley (Board member) re. Pension Portfolio Controversy

/in , /by

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE  October 21, 2013 

Mike Riley and RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity Concerned That Politics May Trump Good Policy

Statement from Mike Riley, board member for the Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity:

“While questions about corruption and mismanagement of state public employee pension fund portfolios continue to swirl, our Center is concerned about the larger public policy implications.

First, whether or not hedge fund and other alternative investments are a legitimate allocation tool to protect taxpayers and retirees against devastating economic downturns like we saw in 2008: If the answer is yes, it is important that the negative political climate on this topic does not dissuade state and local finance officials from pursuing this course in an open and transparent way.

Second, whether or not this controversy will undermine the positive pension reforms taken by our state in 2011. Rhode Island must continue to move forward with pension reform, not backward.”

Mike Riley is an experienced hedge fund manager and Director of the RI Association of Hedge Fund Managers. He has served on the Center’s board since February of 2013.

The Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity, a nonpartisan public policy think tank, is the state’s leading free-enterprise advocacy organization. The Center works to make a profound, positive impact on the lives of every family and business in the state through the exchange of market-based ideas and reform solutions aimed at restoring economic competitiveness, educational opportunities and – ultimately – hope for a brighter future.

Report: Moving Forward with Health Reform in Rhode Island

/in , , , /by
[button url=”http://www.rifreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/ricfp-movingforward-101413.pdf” target=”_blank” size=”small” style=”royalblue” ]Download Full Report (PDF)[/button]

Even with implementation of Rhode Island’s health benefits exchange under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), HealthSourceRI, close to 100,000 Rhode Islanders may not have adequate options unless additional provisions are made by the state. Access to affordable health care is one of the most important and personal decisions anyone can make.

Previous reports by the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity have documented both the financial disincentives created by the ACA when it comes to purchasing insurance and identified and quantified the groups of people who are likely to remain uninsured, perhaps up to 97,000 Rhode Islanders.

Anticipated insurance premium hikes are expected to price many individuals out of the market, notwithstanding the subsidies available through the exchange, and other reasons exist for individuals to elect not to purchase insurance, such as lack of perceived value or concern about paying for controversial services like contraception and abortion. With taxes already at overly burdensome levels, it is critical for Rhode Island to identify and promote alternative programs that will provide many more Rhode Islanders with access to health care, without placing further burdens on taxpayers.

State officials are encouraged to seek additional remedies to address this pending shortfall. The free-market programs recommended in this report by our Center are:

  • Mandate-free and mandate-lite, full-disclosure insurance policies
  • Interstate insurance sales
  • Health care sharing ministries
  • Critical illness and accident insurance

Also included in this report are other program recommendations.

It is our Center’s conclusion that it is not feasible that a government-centric, one-size-fits-all approach via the state’s health benefits exchange can adequately address the needs of a highly diverse population. Only with additional patient-centric, consumer-oriented options can we move toward the goal of ensuring that more Rhode Islanders achieve health care and financial peace of mind.

Read our prior Report: Left Behind by Healthcare in RI

Commentary: PolitiFact Invents Fantasy Arguments to Rule Childcare Unionization Statement ‘Mostly False’

/in , /by

Commentary by Mike Stenhouse, CEO

Earlier this year I commented on how Rhode Island’s political class was living in a land of make believe. Today, we add PolitiFact-RI, the Providence Journal’s allegedly non-biased fact-checking arm, as yet another defender of the failed status-quo that resides in this fantasy world.

landofmakebelieveJennifer Parrish is a home childcare provider in Minnesota that our Center brought to Rhode Island in September to help raise awareness about the broken promises and dangers of unionization for her fellow providers here in the Ocean State. She conducted media interviews and series of ‘Child Care Union 101″ seminars across the state.

Prior to her visit, she published a passionate and thoughtful OpEd in the ProJo, which included the statement: “Six years after unionization, 20,000 fewer children in Illinois were being served by the Child Care and Development Fund program.”

In this past Sunday’s edition, PolitiFact, in analyzing her claim, first admits that Parrish’s statement is indeed accurate, only to then create its own fantasy assumptions, to finally arrive at the ruling that the statement is ‘mostly false’.

At a more general level, we can only guess why PolitiFact would betray journalistic integrity to invent such a torturous process to claim that a true statement is false. Maybe they believe that a charismatic and appealing figure, such as Jennifer Parrish, could pose a real problem if her story and the facts were to be seen as credible? Maybe, in order to defend the union status-quo, they felt someone needed to cut her off at the knees? Whatever their motive, PolitiFact created arguments out of thin air by putting ‘make believe’ words in her mouth, then claiming those fake words were false.

Here’s how they constructed their preposterous ruling:

First, start with a statement that is 96% true (actually 19,200 fewer children were served).

Second, make believe that Parrish intended this statement to apply only to children in home-based care, when in reality, knowing the facts, Parrish purposely meant this statement to apply to children in all kinds of childcare. She never qualified her statement in the way that PolitiFact fantasizes she did.

Third, make believe that Parrish blamed unionization as the reason for the decrease, when in reality she never made any such claim in her opinion piece. Another fantasy, created entirely by PolitiFact.

Fourth, rule that PolitiFact’s own make believe assertions are false.

Finally, apply that guilt to Parrish’s original ‘true’ statement, then rule that the statement now magically has become ‘mostly false’.

Presto, voila … an obviously biased, adverse ruling created entirely out of thin air.

One of the more blatant examples of media activism we have seen.

The obvious question is: who fact-checks the state’s official fact-checker?

Center Criticizes State Labor Relations Board Decision to Dismiss Request

/in , , /by
Providence, RI — In a brief and vague letter, the State Labor Relations Board (SLRB) dismissed a request by the Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity to await the landmark precedent that the U.S. Supreme Court will likely set in early 2014 about whether or not independent home care providers can be classified as a kind of public employee solely for the purpose of unionization. Submitting its request in the interests of the Rhode Island taxpayer, the Center had suggested that no election should be held for the certification of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) to represent the providers until the Constitutionality of doing so is clarified.

“It is the epitome of irresponsibility to rush into this election without any public debate and legal analysis of how the Supreme Court’s planned hearings, or the recent federal appeals court ruling, might affect plans here in our state. The highest court in the land has clearly signaled that there may be a constitutional issue with forced unionization”, commented Mike Stenhouse, CEO for the Center. “It would be totally unfair to child care providers to conduct an election under this cloud, only to find out in a few months that the entire process may soon be ruled as unconstitutional.”The letter of dismissal, SLRB Administrator Robyn Golden states that SLRB “policy” leaves the Center with no standing to make requests of the government board. She goes on to assert that “it is also not within the Board’s statutory autority to act on your request or any requests of this nature.”

Neither state law nor policy places restrictions upon the parties permitted to petition the board with information relevant to its decisions. Moreover, regulations place no restrictions upon the board in the course of scheduling elections for union representation. According to regulation 8.02.5, “it shall provide that such election be conducted by an Agent of the Board at such time and place, and upon terms or conditions, as the Board may specify.”

“The Rhode Island taxpayer has every right to ask the SLRB to avoid lawsuits associated with potentially unconstitutional laws,” said Stenhouse, “and the board has the authority to take that precaution.”
In authorizing and scheduling an election about whether or not upwards of 680 home child care providers should accept the SEIU as their exclusive union representative, the SLRB would fail to seriously consider the Court’s announcement last week that it will hear a case that will determine whether Illinois home-care providers can be forced into union ranks against their will. Previously, the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted an injunction to stop a planned election of home child care providers in Minnesota, pending action from the U.S. Supreme Court.

Earlier this month, the Center published a report highlighting concerns that unionization may cause for taxpayers, service providers, and other independent business owners. All related information can be viewed on the Center’s website at www.RIFreedom.org .
The Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity, a nonpartisan public policy think tank, is the state’s leading free-enterprise advocacy organization. The Center works to make a profound, positive impact on the lives of every family and business in the state through the exchange of market-based ideas and reform solutions aimed at restoring economic competitiveness, educational opportunities and – ultimately – hope for a brighter future.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
OCTOBER 8, 2013
CONTACT: MIKE STENHOUSE
401-429-6115, info@rifreedom.org

Rhode Island Employment Snapshot, August 2013: Needle Keeps Moving

/in , , /by

Leading the country in the percentage drop of people who say that they are employed, Rhode Island’s unemployment rate skipped to 9.1% in August. According to the statistics published by the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 4,469 fewer Rhode Islanders reported being employed than did the month before, and 3,729 fewer people reported that they’re either working or looking for work.

If the second number (the “labor force”) had remained the same, August’s unemployment rate would have been 9.7%. August nearly reduced all employment gains in Rhode Island over the past year.

As can be seen in the first chart, below, Rhode Island’s labor force (which hasn’t been this small since August 2002) is only 3,395 people higher than the number of people working just before the recession started.  Another drop like August’s will mean that about the same number of people who were unemployed in January 2007 have since completely dropped out of the labor force.

If the current employment existed with the same-sized labor force as at the beginning of the chart, the unemployment rate would be 12.9%.

The second chart shows that the Ocean State remains well behind Massachusetts and Connecticut.  A comparison of this chart from month to month would show Rhode Island’s relative position worsening.

RI-laborforceandemp-0107-0813

RIMACT-laborforceandemp-0813perc0107

Center to Conduct “Child Care Union 101′ Seminars

/in , , , /by

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE  – September 18, 2013

Providence, RI — The Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity announced today that it will conduct a series of “Child Care Union 101” seminars this coming Saturday for home child care providers, including a bi-lingual session.

To raise awareness among providers who will participate in an upcoming election about whether or not to accept the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) as their exclusive union representative, the Center has received funding to launch a public awareness campaign, with the goal of reaching as many of the 580 providers as possible, in order to provide them with important information before they vote.

The campaign, which kicked off with a post-card mailer this past weekend to providers, will also include social media and telephone outreach.

The private seminars for home child care providers will be conducted by Jennifer Parrish, a child care provider who for years has been organizing providers in Minnesota, and whose organization, the Coalition of Union Free Providers, is partnering with the Center to provide information about the impact that unionization may have on the family child care profession. According to Parrish, “when providers have access to this information, they overwhelmingly oppose unionization.”

The three “Child Care Union 101” Seminars to be held on Saturday September 21, are:

* 10:00AM – 12:00PM (Bi-lingual); Riverside Library 475 Bullocks Point Avenue, Riverside, RI

* 1:00PM – 3:00PM  Cranston Knights of Columbus Hall 1047 Park Avenue #3, Cranston, RI

* 3:30PM – 5:30PM North Providence Free Library 1810 Mineral Spring Avenue, North Providence, RI

Providers can RSVP at the Coalition’s website:  www.childcareunioninfo.com.

Earlier this week, the Center published a report introducing the concerns that unionization may cause for taxpayers, service providers, and other small business owners. The full report can be viewed here.

 

—————————————————-

REPORT: What Taxpayers Should Know About the Unionization of the Home Child Care Industry

/in , , , /by

Stenhouse discusses issue on WPRI-12 NewsMakers … 

[button url=”http://www.rifreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/RICFP-ChildCareUnion-091613.pdf” target=”_blank” size=”small” style=”royalblue” ]Download Full Report (PDF)[/button]

MEDIA RELEASE, 9/16/13

Providence, RI — With the independence of almost 580 home child care providers to be decided in an upcoming election about whether or not to accept the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) as their exclusive union representative, the Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity published a report today highlighting the risks to the home child care profession, to taxpayers, and to other independent small business owners and contractors in the state.

With record of broken promises and negative consequences in other states and with severe structural budget deficits, both child care professionals and taxpayers in Rhode Island should beware. The report, which reviews data from other states where similar unionization has occurred, documents the associated decrease in child care participation rates and discusses the future risk to other professions in the state.

The Center is partnering with the Coalition of Union Free Providers, a national organization comprised of child care professionals from other states, to provide information about the impact that unionization may have on the family child care profession.

“Across the country, child care providers have found themselves stuck paying high union dues and fees with little to no benefit in return. These providers often didn’t realize their businesses were targets of the SEIU until it was too late”, said Jennifer Parrish, founder of the multi-state Coalition. “Every provider has the right know all the facts, including what this will cost them and how this may impact their profession, prior to casting a ballot. When providers have access to this information, they overwhelmingly oppose unionization.”

The Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity, a nonpartisan public policy think tank, is the state’s leading free-enterprise advocacy organization. The Center works to make a profound, positive impact on the lives of every family and business in the state through the exchange of market-based ideas and reform solutions aimed at restoring economic competitiveness, educational opportunities and – ultimately – hope for a brighter future.

Report Summary

Hundreds of home-based child care professionals, who started their own businesses to build better futures for themselves, may soon lose their independence and the freedom to provide services in the manner they see fit. Most never considered that unionization would be part of their work; nor do they see themselves as incapable of operating their businesses without union representation.

Today, they are independent small business owners; in the coming weeks, if a majority of those who vote at a small special election opt to unionize, every one of them will see herself transformed into a quasi-government worker, forced to pay compulsory union dues or fees and subject to the agenda of a national and international political entity: the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

The successful unionization of this group of providers, however, will not end the matter, with consequences reaching into industries throughout the state. Other independent service providers who receive subsidized payments from the state may also be forced to unionize against their will, including small business owners or independent contractors in other areas of child or home care, health services, real estate, or even in the retail industry.

Regarding home child care providers, this report reviews results from other states and discusses a number of important considerations and projections of which these providers and the general public should be aware, especially those who are eligible to vote in the upcoming election. If patterns observed with similar efforts in other states hold true in the Ocean State, there are a number of reasons for the child care industry, other professionals, and taxpayers to be concerned:

  • Broken promises: Unions are usually not able to fulfill the promises they make to providers.
  • Individual rights: Child care providers may be severely restricted.
  • Reduced services: In other states, when home child care providers are unionized, the number of providers and children served usually shrinks.
  • Legality: Involuntary representation by a state-selected monopoly union may be unconstitutional.
  • Increased union clout: The financial and political power of the statewide union stands to be substantially increased, with up to $500,000 or more to further advance its political agenda.
  • Trojan horse: The stated mission of the AFL-CIO labor union is to expand its membership in Rhode Island, targeting other independent contractors and small businesses in the state.
  • Burden on taxpayers: As unions seek to provide benefits to a newly unionized professionals, it will come at taxpayer expense.
  • Missed opportunities: Other alternatives do exist for child care and other service providers that might be better for everybody involved.
[button url=”http://www.rifreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/RICFP-ChildCareUnion-091613.pdf” target=”_blank” size=”small” style=”royalblue” ]Download Full Report (PDF)[/button]
See Also:

Center Calls on Labor Relations Board to Revise Child Care Unionization Ballot Language

Unionization of RI Childcare Providers May Be Unconstitutional

Center Calls on Labor Relations Board to Revise Child Care Unionization Ballot Language

/in , , , /by

View the official petition to SLRB here … 

The Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity is calling on the State Labor Relations Board to revise the proposed language on the ballot in the upcoming election that will determine whether or not upward of 580 private contractors – that provide child care services in their home to clients who receive state-subsidized assistance – will become unionized.

The Center recommends a simple revision that more clearly defines the reality of the the options that these childcare providers are being forced to consider. Per a recent report in the Providence Journal, the ballot question currently reads: ‘Do you desire to be represented for the purpose of collective bargaining by Service Employees International Union, District 1199, NE or by no provider representative.”

This language is devoid of the word ‘exclusively’, and, therefore, does not appropriately highlight an important provision that child care providers should be made aware of; that such representation would be exclusive to SEIU, and that by voting to unionize, providers will be forced to petition their state government through an involuntary association. As previously argued by the Center, this may be in violation of their constitutional right to freedom of association.

The Center recommends that the ballot language should be revised to read: ‘Do you desire to be represented for the purpose of collective bargaining exclusively by Service Employees International Union, District 1199, NE or by no provider representative.’

“Many providers, who today proudly call themselves independent business owners, free to make their own decisions about how best to operate their business, are concerned that, after the election, they may be involuntarily reduced to the status of unionized state employees, subject to the agenda of national and international unions, forced to pay dues, and forced to be represented exclusively by the state’s hand-picked monopoly union”, said Mike Stenhouse, CEO for the Center.

Following remarks this past weekend (@ 9:00 minute mark) on WPRI-12’s Executive Suite by AFL-CIO union boss, George Nee, the Center is also concerned that the child care unionization effort is a ‘Trojan Horse’ and just the first of of many planned steps of organized labor where other independent contractors and small business owners across the state will soon also be forced to unionize (e.g., child care centers, home health care providers, landlords), providing even more financial and political clout to unions, and creating a further drag on the state’s already stagnant job market and bloated budget.

Related Links:  Unionization of Child Care Providers May Be Unconstituional

Unionization of RI Childcare Providers May Be Unconstitutional

/in , , /by

An attorney from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation provided the following analysis for the Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity regarding the current effort in the Ocean State to unionize over 550 childcare providers, many of whom are moms running their own independent small businesses.

Recently, Rhode Island passed a law requiring childcare providers caring for children from low-income families to accept monopoly union representation.  The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has petitioned for an election to become the monopoly union representative. If the SEIU wins the election, it will negotiate with the state over reimbursement rates for child care providers and other conditions of their businesses and have the right to confiscate dues from childcare subsidy payments.

Rhode Island is violating providers’ First Amendment rights by forcing them into an unwanted relationship with the SEIU. The First Amendment protects the right of freedom of speech and to petition government. The government does not have the power to force citizens to accept handpicked lobbyists for small businesses.

Childcare providers are small, independent business owners. They set their own working conditions and hours and hire their own employees. Caring for children on state assistance does not transform them into public employees, nor does it create an employment relationship with the state government.

Forcing providers into a union is no different than if Rhode Island tried to force all small businesses to accept the Chamber of Commerce as their mandatory lobbyist. Providers have the right to lobby the state government though voluntary associations, rather than through the state’s handpicked monopoly union.

Similar schemes in Michigan, Illinois, and Minnesota have been challenged as unconstitutional. Michigan eventually ended its scheme after a lawsuit was filed, while the Illinois case is pending review at the United States Supreme Court.

Aaron Solem, is a staff attorney for the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation in Springfield, Virginia.

Related Links:

Center-calls-on-labor-relations-board-to-revise-child-care-unionization-ballot-language

ProJo OpEd: Not Too Late to Block Union Grab

(The Current) Opinion:  Take It From Someone Who’s Been There: Don’t Unionize

(GoLocalProv) Childcare Unionization Battel Heats Up in RI

Coalition of  Union Free Providers (general information)