Have Teacher Unions in Rhode Island Been Unlawfully Collecting Dues for Years?

 

Government officials take an oath of office to preserve the constitutional rights of their constituents. However, in Rhode Island, school board officials who approved agreements with special-interest public employee unions have effectively hidden those rights from their employees via unconstitutional collective bargaining provisions that are in direct defiance of the Supreme Court Of the United States (SCOTUS).

In 2018, the highest court in America ruled that public employees must retain power over their own paychecks. Yet, since then, many government unions in Rhode Island may have unlawfully collected dues from employees by propagating misleading language that overtly shields them from knowledge of their rights.

The landmark June 2018 US Supreme Court decision in the Janus v AFSCME case opened the door to worker freedom in America. But some of the old political machines were taken aback, especially government employee unions at the state and local level. SCOTUS ruled that no longer could a public employee be mandated to pay union “dues”, “Association fees”, “agency fees”, or “shop fees” as a condition of their employment.

Under the weight of this ruling, most public employee unions across the country, reluctantly realizing the great financial and legal risk of non-compliance, immediately amended their policies and subsequent contract agreements to comply with the new law … such that any dues payments could only be collected once the employee affirmatively provided clear authorization … but not so for many unions in Rhode Island.

According to the Mackinac Center in Michigan, one of nation’s top legal and public policy experts when it comes to government unions, Rhode Island’s rate of non-compliance with the Janus ruling looks to be among the highest in the country. The extent to which blatantly anti-Janus-constitutional provisions still exist in many teacher union Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) is alarming.

An initial review of about three dozen collective bargaining agreements with local school districts in Rhode Island reveals an alarming number – eleven (more than 1 in 4) – that were signed or put into effect after the Janus ruling, contained dues or fees mandate provisions that clearly defy the Supreme Court’s ruling … provisions that are legally unenforceable.

Types of language clearly violating the Janus Supreme Court ruling that were found in the eleven Rhode Island CBAs with local chapters of the NEA, AFT, AFL-CIO, and AFSCME … unlawful provisions that remained in effect for years after 2018 … can be summarized as including passages that:

  • Require automatic deduction of dues or fees from employee paychecks without their expressed consent
  • Require payment of dues or fees as a condition of employment
  • Limit the union opt-out time-window for employees

The table below summarizes the unlawful language of offending school districts (supporting details appear as an Appendix at the end of this report:)

As an example of what a properly worded CBA should look like, post-Janus, we look to provisions in the agreement between the Glocester K-5 school district and the Glocester Teachers’ Association for the time period July 2019 to June 2022:

The Glocester school district maintained the above Articles 20 and 21, post-Janus, but appropriately REMOVED the following provision that appeared in the district’s pre-Janus CBA:

As national examples of how post-Janus federal court cases compelled government unions to appropriately modify their dues/fees collection policies, what follows is language from two related US Third Circuit cases:

LaSpina v. SEIU Pennsylvania State Council, 985 F.3d 278, 282 (3rd Cir. 2021). After the Supreme Court decided Janus, the Union abandoned its agency-fee setup. The day the Court issued its decision, Steve Catanese, president of SEIU Local 668, wrote to Jack Finnerty of the Scranton Public Library “that the Supreme Court has ruled in Janus” and has “held public-sector employers may no longer deduct agency fees from non-consenting employees.” Supp. App. 69. Catanese’s letter instructed Finnerty to, “effective immediately, please discontinue fair-share fee deductions.” Id. (emphasis in original).

“Therefore, under Janus I, Pennsylvania’s public sector agency shop law was no longer constitutional.” Diamond v. Pennsylvania Educ. Ass’n, 972 F.3d 262, 268 (3rd Cir. 2020). Circuit law directly on point.

Other Supreme Court precedent illustrates what must be done to demonstrate employee consent. The Court has ruled that, to demonstrate consent to a waiver of constitutional rights, there must be evidence that the waiver is a “knowing, intelligent act … done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and likely consequences.” Brady v United States, 397 U.S. 742, 748 (1970). “It must also be done with “a full awareness of both the nature of the right being abandoned and the consequences of the decision to abandon it.” Moran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 421,421 (1986) …

Per the SCOTUS ruling, before employees can consent to financially supporting a public sector union, they must know both what their rights are and the consequences of waiving those rights.

Yet, not every school district in Rhode Island was as careful to follow the law as was Glocester, as many districts continued to allow overtly unconstitutional language to remain in their post-Janus CBAs, without providing employees with the required notification of their rights.

One of the most blatant examples of such an unconstitutional provision appears in the September 2018 Westerly Teachers’ Association CBA:

How did this happen? Elected school committee members were either complicit with teacher unions in allowing such “unlawful” language to remain, or they were unwitting victims of malfeasance or ill-advice by their school committee solicitors, who are highly paid to provide accurate legal guidance.

The fact is, that for over three years, many teachers and other school district staff in Rhode Island may have been fraudulently deceived into paying union dues or association fees because of the unconstitutional language in their respective CBAs. These employees likely had dues automatically deducted from their paychecks without ever understanding that their First Amendment rights – that they could not be forced to pay part of their paycheck to their union – had been restored in 2018.

Indeed, as compared with opt-out rates nationally, Rhode Island teachers and other public employees are choosing to “opt-out” of paying union dues at rates far lower than their counterparts in other states. While states like California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Massachusetts are seeing more than 15% of workers opt out of paying money to their unions, we estimate that less than 5% of Rhode Island union members have opted out. Now, we may know why.

In the majority Supreme Court decision in 2018, Justice Alito was noted that billions of dollars were likely collected by government unions nationwide in recent decades. Much of this money came from employees who never wanted to pay union dues in the first place but were forced to, because of prior legal precedent.

However, over the past three and a half years, Rhode Island unions may have similarly, yet unlawfully, collected millions of dollars in dues from employees who may have chosen to opt-out … had they not been deceived by clearly unconstitutional language.

Obvious questions must be asked, including:

  • How many teachers and school staff would not have paid union dues if they had been appropriately advised of their rights? How much money was fraudulently collected by unions?
  • Why do so man teacher union CBAs in Rhode Island contain such unconstitutional language? 
  • Why did Rhode Island school committees and teacher unions engage in such non-compliance so much more than any other state?
  • Did school committee members knowingly turn a blind eye towards this malfeasance, or were they completely ignorant of these obvious violations?
  • How can high-paid school committee solicitors allow such obviously unconstitutional language to be included in recent CBAs?
  • Is anything comparable to this level of unconstitutionality occurring in non-teacher public employee CBA contracts in Rhode Island?

Why in some cases, does the AFSCME CBA have proper language regarding dues and fees, while the teacher contract over the same period in the same school district has unconstitutional language?

The main question this report raises … is whether or not certain public teacher unions in Rhode Island conspired to illicitly collect union dues from unwitting teachers and staff?

This is not the first time that a government entity in Rhode Island has exhibited such blatant defiance of the US Supreme Court’s Janus decision. In 2018, our Center’s MyPayMySayRI.com campaign triggered a public letter of warning from then Attorney General Peter Kilmartin, after our outreach initiative sought to educate government workers about their restored Janus rights. The letter from Rhode Island’s highest law enforcement official contained numerous unsubstantiated, unspecified, and false assertions of “misinformation” being put forth by our RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity, such as the bogus claim that we were mis-informing public employees of their rights not to join or pay union dues or fees.

Then, as now, the pattern of government officials in Rhode Island conducting the bidding of public sector unions – at both the state and local level – even to the extent of seeking to obfuscate the constitutional rights of its members … runs directly contrary to the public oaths they took upon entering office.

A review of non-school district CBAs will soon be conducted by the Center.

The following Appendix lists images the actual passages from post-Janus teacher-union CBAs in Rhode Island that contain language that does not comply with the US Supreme Court’s Janus ruling.


APPENDIX

Rhode Island School Districts with Unconstitutional Collective Bargaining Provisions

 

Burrillville: NEA Contract Period: September 2021-2024

Page-40: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=YnNkLXJpLm5ldHxob21lfGd4Ojc1NTMwZjU2M2U5MDhiMQ

Page-5: https://core-docs.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/asset/uploaded_file/236104/CF_CBA_18-21_FINAL_FORM.pdf 

Foster-Glocester: NEA Contract Period 2020-2023

Page-29: http://www.fg.k12.ri.us/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=9841126

Johnston: AFL-CIO Local 808 Contract period 2017-2020, extended in 2020 by the school district

Pages 4-5: https://www.johnstonschools.org/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=20171014

June 2020 Johnston School District Minutes

 

Lincoln: AFSCME Contract Period September 2018-2021

Page-4: https://www.lincolnps.org/cms/lib/RI50000681/Centricity/Domain/44/L2671-contract-2018-2021-02-07-19-FINAL.pdf

New Shoreham: AFSCME Contract Period 2019-2022

Page-2: https://4.files.edl.io/4ef8/11/15/19/153226-ac2437cb-2ef2-43d3-8fb7-ab0bbf4cb0cf.pdf

North Smithfield: NEA Contract Period 2021-24

Page-6: NSTA Collective Bargaining Agreement

Portsmouth: AFSCME Contract Period September 2018-2021
Page-2:

https://core-docs.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/asset/uploaded_file/1355692/Council_94_Contract_7.1.18_-_7.30.21.pdf

Tiverton: NEA Contract Period; 2019 –

Page-9: http://www.tivertonschools.org/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=8558123

Westerly: NEA Contract Period September 2018-2021

Page-5: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1V6e4ChNvhLkp6-Y0zqPUdieauxOzAMvm/view

West Warwick: AFT Contract Period September 2018-2023

Page-21: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NdyhtJYJb0SibVVm0BXmthzTkehxDtjU/view

Union transparency

Center submits federal “official comment” in support of union transparency rule

Official Comment on Federally Proposed Union Reporting Rule

Union members and the public have right to increased transparency

Providence, RI – The RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity today submitted an official comment to the US Department of Labor (DOL) in support of its proposed rule, “Labor Organization Annual Financial reports; LM Form Revisions.” 

The Center believes the proposed DOL changes are important updates to union reporting and will, as a result, provide union members with the information they need to hold their unions to account and ensure their dues are spent as they intend.

According to the Center’s CEO, Mike Stenhouse, “The rule promotes increased transparency and benefits American workers.” Informing public employees of their legal rights and of the activities of their unions is an important component of the Center’s ongoing MyPayMySayRI.com initiative. 

The Center argues that these rule changes are urgently needed so that union members have a better ability to see and understand how their dues are being spent. Increased transparency would help the DOL and local officials to root out corruption. Importantly, it also would empower union workers to make more informed decisions relating to their participation in unions and to monitor union activities so that they can better-protect their hard-earned dollars.

Also, because detailed public reporting of union spending is not always required, bad actors sometime see a loophole to try to game the system to their personal advantage. The Center’s official comment cites three examples of recent union corruption in Rhode Island that have led to criminal convictions involving wire-fraud and embezzlement. Also, in its comment, the Center suggested modifications to the proposed rule. 

The official comment period closes at midnight tonight. Federal action to enact, or not, the proposed rule could occur in 2021.

Union Political Spending

NEW REPORT: Union Political Spending – a Web of Corruption

Report Exposes Hyper-partisanship and Radical Agenda Funded by Government Union Political Spending

Providence, RI – Not every teacher, first-responder, clerk, or other public servant considers themselves to be Democrats or part of the “progressive-left” movement in Rhode Island. Yet every employee who is member of a government union in our state is paying dues that directly support this extreme political agenda … along with the corrupt quid quo pro that comes with union political spending.

A new report released today by the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity – RI Political Spending: A Web of Corruption – lays out research of union political spending in Rhode Island in the 2018 election and since 2000. The report also provides multiple examples of what it calls a “web of corruption” where quid pro quo political favors coincided with union political cash.

“Most people don’t realize that the partnership between the progressive-left, government unions, and the Democratic party, which has created an iron triangle of cronyism and insider politics, is actually funded by each and every taxpayer in the state of Rhode Island,” commented Mike Stenhouse, the Center’s CEO. “This money merry-go-round is destroying our state: Taxes paid by residents fund the salaries of government employees, whose dues fund union activities, which in turn are contributed almost exclusively to one political party and to support just one, radical political ideology, who then work together to advance more pro-labor policies.”

Over $411,000 was spent by public employee unions to influence the 2018 elections :

  • 97% of government union campaign contributions went to Democrats
  • SEIU contributed about $150,000 to Democrats, who that year gave the union a major legislative victory that opened the door for the unionization of home care workers
  • 96% of recipients of NEARI PACE donations were Democrats
  • 95% of recipients of AFT (RI) donations were Democrats
  • 99% of recipients of the RI Brotherhood of Correctional Officers donations were Democrats
  • 98% of recipient of the RI Association of Firefighters donations were Democrats
  • 96% of recipients of the RI AFL-CIO PAC donations were Democrats
  • Over a half-million dollars was spent by unions on lobbying and related legislative outreach.

Nationally, and in addition to direct political contributions, for example, the National Education Association of Rhode Island’s (NEARI’s) parent organization, the NEA, alone gave out grants exceeding $100 million to far-left advocacy groups across.

Other specific examples of union-money corruption and cronyism are detailed in the report, including features about union executive and State Senator, Valerie Lawson, and union head, George Nee

The full nine-page report can be viewed here.

alaska-opt-in-form-recommended

Center Recommends Alaska-type Opt-in Form for Public Employees. 1900 Already Opted-out?

R.I. Should Follow Alaska’s Lead With a Clear Union Opt-in Form Process

Center’s My Pay-My Say Campaign Has Already Produced up to 1900 Rhode Island Union Opt-outs

Providence, RI – The RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity recommends that all state and municipal employers in Rhode Island follow Alaska’s lead to protect the rights of public employees by achieving full compliance with the 2018 US Supreme Court Janus v AFSCME decision.

The Center recommends that the various state and local departments should create a new form and related procedures to verify employees’ identity, explain their full rights, and document their clear intent. Not doing so puts government employers in danger of being in violation of workers’ first amendment rights.

“According to the highest court in the land, no public servant should have union dues automatically deducted from their paycheck unless they provide clear affirmative consent with full understanding of their Janus rights,” advised Mike Stenhouse, CEO for the Center. “Without a union opt-in process that fully complies with Janus, governments and unions may be at risk of legal action by employees who may have been misinformed.”

In the summer of 2018 the Center initiated its MyPayMySayRI.com campaign, which seeks to advise public employees of their newly restored first amendment rights under Janus

Since then, based actual responses to dozens of records-requests, it can be documented that there are 811 more government workers in 2019 who chose not to pay expensive government union dues than in 2018. This means more than 4% of workers opted-out of their unions. Extrapolated across the entire state, it is estimated that there are now 1900 fewer dues- or fee-paying union members than last year.

In late September, Alaska Governor Michael J. Dunleavy, backed by an opinion from the state’s Attorney General, announced the implementation of an administrative order to protect the first amendment rights of State employees by bringing State government into compliance with the 2018 court ruling. Per Dunleavy’s press release:

“In Janus, the Supreme Court held that 1) government employees cannot be required to pay dues or fees to a public sector union as a condition of employment, and 2) no money can be deducted by employers for public sector unions “unless the employee affirmatively consents to pay.” Public employers, such as the State, cannot according to the court, deduct union dues or fees from an employee’s wages unless the employer has “clear and compelling evidence” that the employee has authorized such deductions. The administrative order only applies to State of Alaska employees currently represented by a union.

The administrative order directs the Alaska Department of Administration to create an initial opt-in program where unionized State employees decide, online or in written form, if they want union dues deducted from their paychecks, which would be revocable at any time.”

NEW REPORT: Collective Bargaining Gives Incentive to Providence Teachers NOT to Work for 37 Days

37 Days: Paid for Not Working in Providence Schools

Collective-bargaining contracts provide a disincentive to teach

Providence, RI –– The collective-bargaining agreement between the Providence Teachers Union and the government of Providence may explain why chronic teacher absences are one of the major problems contributing to the dismal K-12 educational conditions in the capital city. 

The RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity today released a report – Paid for Not Working, Collective Bargaining Taxpayer Ripoff #2 : Providence Teacher Leaves of Absence – that highlights the many forms of collectively-bargained “leave time” allowed for teachers. About a quarter of all Providence teachers are being paid for missing 10% (18 days) or more of their vital class time with students. As the union contract actually allows for up to 37 days of paid-time-off per year per teacher, the teacher absentee problem could be twice as bad.

“It is not difficult to understand that if our front-line public servants have incentive to not actually be on the front lines, then the overall quality of those public services will suffer,” said Mike Stenhouse, the Center’s CEO. “We should be thankful that more teachers are not taking full advantage of the numerous and counter-productive leave provisions that unions demand.”

The Center’s new report, an expansion of its Taxpayer Ripoff #1 Ghost Workers report in May, discusses the financial and societal costs of these excessive leave provisions and includes a table listing the many ways and days teachers are allowed to not teach and, in most cases, to be paid for not working. 

In the spring of 2019, the Center published a major report – Public Union Excesses – detailing the $888 million per year in excessive costs paid by taxpayers due to overly generous collective bargaining provisions in government union contracts at the state and local levels. With two-thirds of these costs absorbed by municipal taxpayers, property taxes could be lowered by as much as 25% if government services were contracted at normal market rates.

PAID FOR NOT WORKING, COLLECTIVE-BARGAINING TAXPAYER RIPOFF #2 : Providence Teacher Leaves of Absence

It is not difficult to understand that if our front-line public servants have incentive to not actually be on the front lines, then the overall quality of those public services will suffer … Mike Stenhouse

In the spring of 2019, the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity published a major report — Public Union Excesses — detailing the $888 million per year in excessive costs paid by taxpayers due to overly generous collective bargaining provisions in government union contracts at the state and local levels. With two-thirds of these costs absorbed by municipal taxpayers, property taxes could be lowered by as much as 25% if government services were contracted at normal market rates.

Societal Costs. The excessive financial costs to taxpayers may not be as troubling as the social costs resulting from government worker unionization in our state. Union officials have propagated a culture in which extracting every possible dime from taxpayers and dues-payers, regardless of the impact on the quality of the services rendered, appears to be the objective, a culture that inevitably has creeped into the workplace. 

Educational Failures. Perhaps no area of government service exemplifies this negative value proposition more clearly than public education. In November 2018, the state released the RICAS student assessment scores, which highlighted the Ocean State’s dismal performance of schools within its public educational system. Furthermore, a July 2018 report showed that Rhode Island schools also suffered from the third-highest teacher absentee rate in the nation.

Connecting the dots, Public Union Excesses clearly lays out the many union contract provisions that provide a disincentive for teachers and other public employees to actually show up for work or perform the vital public services they were hired to conduct at peak levels. 

Teacher Attendance. With a national spotlight shining on the government-run Providence public school system for operating what some have characterized as among the worst schools in the country, the lack of consistent and reliable teacher attendance has been in the news.  Boston Globe journalist Dan McGowan reports that 500 of the city’s teachers (more than one-quarter) were absent at least 18 times, which is 10% of the school year.  That percentage is subtracted from teachers’ 181-day work-year, which is already 21% shorter than the approximate private-sector average work-year of 230.

Parents and interested Rhode Islanders might wonder how this is possible, so the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity took a look at the Providence Teachers Union contract.  Our results are shown in the table below.

In summary, in a standard year, teachers are contractually allowed to take up to 26 days off for a variety of reasons, from sick leave (15 days) to “purposes connected with the welfare of the school and/or community” (2 days).  Unlike in the private sector, unused sick days for teachers are allowed to roll over — in full — from year to year, up to 150 days.  A teacher can use up to 135 paid days off in one year before facing any consequences.

Common life events like weddings and deaths can add more time to the annual total — 11 days for a year with one of each.  Additionally, all teachers are eligible for up to another 11 days for union activities on a rotating and limited basis.  Additionally, a union professional development/mentoring coordinator is relieved of teaching duties for one-fifth of the school year, while the union president is relieved for two-fifths; that’s the equivalent of 36 and 72 days each.  Adding in the other days off available to all teachers, the union president would be able to not do any actual teaching for the equivalent of 101 of the work year’s 181 days.  The Center reported on such absences in our May 2019 “Ghost Workers” report.

On top of this are longer-term and more-rare absences like sabbaticals, quarantine, or job-related-injury leave, which can go for a year or more with pay.  Teachers can also take a year at a time off without pay for a number of reasons.

Of course, when a regular teacher is away for a day or for an extended period of time, a substitute teacher must often be hired at additional expense; in Providence it is estimated that substitute teachers cost taxpayers and extra $7 million per year.

These added costs, combined with the reduced quality of education, are one reason why Providence public schools are performing so poorly.

“PAID FOR NOT WORKING” – COLLECTIVELY BARGAINED, ALLOWED TEACHER ABSENCES IN PROVIDENCE

Number of Days Contract Citation
Standard Year
Sick leave 15 4-1
Personal 2 5-1.4
Superintendent-approved personal 3 5-1.5
Religious observance 3 5-1.2
"Welfare of the school and/or community" 2 5-1.6
Visiting other schools (in or out of district) 1 5-1.7
Subtotal 26
Life Events1
Wedding 2 5-1.1
Bereavement (immediate family) 5 5-2
Bereavement (in-laws) 3 5-2
Bereavement (extended) 1 5-2
Subtotal 11
Union Activities (Limited Number of Teachers)
Delegate to AFL-CIO or other union meetings 5 5-1.3
Negotiating Committee2 1 16-2.2
Union professional development/mentoring attendance 5 8-30-2
Subtotal 11
Total available to any given teacher each year 48
Special Union Positions3
Union professional development/mentoring coordinator4 36 8-30-1
Total available to coordinator 65
Union president5 72 5-6
Total available to union president 101
Other Events
Sabbatical 91 5-3
Compulsory Reserve or National Guard 20 5-7.2
Injured on the job 90 6-1
Assault and/or battery on the job 181 6-2
Government tests & examinations Unlimited 5-8
Court service Unlimited 5-9
Quarantine Unlimited 5-10
Without Pay
Personal 181 5-5.1
Union service 181 5-6
Military leave 181 5-7
Parental/adoption leave 181 5-11
Notes:
1 The “life events” subtotal assumes one of each in a given year.
2 We estimate an average of one day per year in total negotiating time for each teacher on the negotiating committee. Some years, this would be zero, and other years, it could be much higher than 1.
3 The union coordinator and president totals adjust the days available for all teachers so as not to double count their lighter work schedules.
4 The number of days off for the coordinator is the one-fifth schedule reduction applied to the full school year.
5 The number of days off for the president is the two-fifth schedule reduction applied to the full school year.
The Center refutes the unsubstantiated & off-target NEA-RI claims made by two government union officials in publicly responding to our Union Excess Report.

Center Assigns Blame, Calls for Bankruptcy to Help Solve Providence K-12 Disaster

The Government-Union Alliance Has Failed Students
Collective-bargaining savings and immediate private school options are vital

Providence, RI –– The dismal public school system in Providence is clearly the result of a failed and costly government-union alliance, with misplaced priorities, that likely will require new perspectives and city bankruptcy as part of the solution. A state takeover would only be more of the same.

The RI Center for Freedom & Prosperitymaintains that whatever reforms are eventually implemented from whatever public review process is put in place will not help the tens of thousands of Providence students currently in their critical learning years. 

The Center refutes the unsubstantiated & off-target NEA-RI claims made by two government union officials in publicly responding to our Union Excess Report.

“These kids need a new and better learning environment now, today. They cannot wait,” said Mike Stenhouse, the Center’s CEO. “In order to provide Providence and all Rhode Island students with a better chance at a brighter future, new players must have a seat at the table and new thinking is required as part of the solution. This dire situation cannot be turned around if the same people that caused the problem – local and state government and teachers union officials – are in charge of developing solutions.”

Historically, faint-hearted politicians and their teacher union allies have blocked educational reform ideas that have been successful in other states. However, if political leaders are honest and serious about their proclamations that all options must now be considered, and are willing to break those historical ties, the Center offers two practical and significant reform items that can have immediate impact:

1. More Educational Choices for Families. Recognizing that the larger school system reform process will take many, many years – if ever – to take positive effect, the Center suggests that thousands of Providence families can be provided with an an immediate escape-hatch from the drowning Providence school system. Educational Scholarship Accounts (ESAs), first introduced in Rhode Island by the Center in 2014, would empower parents with the freedom and funding to select a private school educational path for their children. Extensive research by the Center showed that an ESA program can be immediately implemented – at no additional cost to state or local taxpayers!

Learn more about the Center’s Bright Today Scholarship program at www.RIFreedom.org/EdChoiceRI or read our mini-report here.

2. Bankruptcy & Collective Bargaining Savings to Repair Schools. The top priority of any public school system must be about educating kids, not enriching adults. Decrepit and rat-infested school buildings can be repaired with savings from reworked overly-generous contracts with the teacher and all Providence unions. The Center’s May 2019 Public Union Excesses report estimated that the city of  Providence is paying $110 million per year above and beyond private-sector rates for collectively-bargained services. This amount of annual money could easily fund the physical repair and upgrade of school buildings in Providence in just a few years. 

However, given the newly enacted “evergreen contracts” law, it is only through bankruptcy proceedings, with a capable receiver, that these excessive collectively- bargained funds can be freed up for use in Providence. This is a Providence problem that must be solved with Providence money. It would be unfair for the state to mandate that taxpayers in other cities and towns to be forced to pay for the capitol city’s incompetence.

After 10 years of perhaps the slowest economic recovery among all states, Rhode Island’s political leaders are not fulfilling their promise to help the average family. Time is running out to stop hurting families and business with high property taxes from excessive government services.

NEW: Center Publishes Municipal Summary of its “Public Union Excesses” Report

Municipalities Across RI are Burdened with $590 million in Excess Costs… Not counting liabilities for paying people not to work!

Providence, RI— The #1 reason why local property taxes are up to 25% higher than they need be, is because of the $590 million in “excessive” costs, shared by municipalities across Rhode Island, for collectively-bargained government services, negotiated by government unions. This according to the landmark report, Public Union Excesses, released by the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity in early May.

Additionally, these same municipalities are also burdened with a liability not often discussed – payments due to government workers who are allowed to “cash in” on their overly-generous and unused allowed “absences” – sick days, personal days, and other compensated leave time – as specified in their unions’ collective bargaining agreements … another $163 million cost heaped upon local taxpayers. 

To underscore these local costs, the Center today published a 4-page summary of its Public Union Excesses report, which focuses on the municipal costs of collective-bargaining with government unions. All related material can be found at www.RIFreedom.org/Unions.

“This summary report is a must-have reference for all local school committee and city and town council members if they are looking for ways to control the exploding costs of collectively-bargained contracts with their municipal unions,” advised Mike Stenhouse, the Center’s CEO. “If you would like print copies, just let us know.”

In Lincoln for example, one table on the summary lists the estimated $13.1 million in excessive costs, while another table lists the $4.3 million owed for paying workers not to work. In East Greenwich, the costs are $9.6 million and $.9 million respectively.

A bar-chart in the summary shows that most public sector employees often enjoy 50% more sick days than their private sector counterparts. Compounding the effect, government workers are usually allowed to carry-forward far more of their accumulated sick days – which can be cashed in each year or upon retirement.

They're called ghost workers. State workers paid for not working, and instead enganing in union business. Your property taxes are only getting higher!

PAID FOR NOT WORKING;TAXPAYER RIPOFF #1: Ghost Workers and the Triple-Whammy of Union Release Time

One of the most objectionable schemes of government union collective bargaining process, which excessively drives up the cost of government for taxpayers, in ways or at levels that do not exist in the private sector, is being paid for not working. This issue, along with many others defined in the Center’s report, Public Union Excesses, contribute to an $888 million per year in excessive collectively-bargained costs, responsible for driving up local property taxes by up to 25%.

After looking at examples in just a few cities and towns, municipal taxpayers across Rhode Island may collectively be paying millions of dollars per year for unionized government employees to spend their public time on work for their unions … and not to work on the public services they were hired to perform.

Adding insult to injury, the many collectively bargained provisions that specifically allow for these so-called ‘ghost workers’ may actually be in violation of state law. More on that later on.

As detailed in the Center’s landmark report, Public Union Excesses, there are multiple schemes in which government unions benefit from overly generous provisions in collective bargaining agreements, provisions that hardly, if ever, are seen in the private sector.

One such provision is called “union release time.” Under this scheme, unions across Rhode Island use taxpayers as contractual piggy banks to fund union activities. How many Rhode Islanders know that they are paying for ‘ghost workers’ who are paid by the public, but who do not actually perform a public service for some or all of their official time? Instead, a common provision — found in many government union collective bargaining agreements — mandates that taxpayers pay the salary and benefits for for certain public employees, who spend time working on their unions’ business.

Union ‘ghost workers’ impose a triple-rip-off on taxpayers.

First, there is the direct cost of paying public workers for not working on public issues. Second, compounding the cost, taxpayers are further ripped-off because, often, an extra worker must be hired (sometimes at overtime rates) to fill in for the ghost worker’s shift.  Third, union workers who are paid with taxpayer dollars to work on union issues … are working directly against the very same taxpayers who pay their salaries. As the Center’s Public Union Excesses report breaks down, collectively bargained government union excesses directly raise property taxes by as much as 25% for every Rhode Island family and business.

This union release time scheme is indeed a rip-off for taxpayers, as many of the designated union ‘ghost workers’ are awarded six-figure compensation packages, paid for by the public … but without the public’s receiving a commensurate return.

In its report, Public Union Excess, the Center estimates that taxpayers in Portsmouth, Rhode Island, are wasting over $8,176 per year on ghost workers, 100% of which is considered “excessive” in the report. This figure does not include the ‘replacement’ costs to hire additional staff.

However, the ‘ghost worker’ issue is much more costly in other cities and towns. In the Rhode Island’s capital city of Providence, for example, Maribeth Calabro, a special educator, whose $83,848 salary and compensation package worth well over $100,000 per year is paid for by local taxpayers, is also president of the Providence Teachers union. Per the city’s collective bargaining agreement with her Providence Teachers Union, Calabro is allowed to spend 40% of her teaching time (with full pay and service credit) to conduct union activities, costing taxpayers over $33,000 per year. Add in the cost of substitute teachers, estimated at over $16,000 per year, and Providence taxpayers are being ripped-off to the tune of almost $50,000 per year … just for this one teacher.

In the 2016 East Providence teachers’ contract, high school teacher and local union president Nicholas Shattuck is allowed to spend 40% of his teaching time, as part of his estimated $70,000 salary, on union business. “The President of the Association shall be relieved of all his/her non-teaching duties to take care of Association business. In addition, the President shall be provided the equivalent of two (2) full days per week at no loss in salary or benefits and the Association agrees to pay one-half (1/2) of the cost. Meaning that the School Department pays for one day and the Association pays for one day.” The estimated net ‘ghost worker’ cost of $14,000 per year, plus substitute costs at around $15,000 per year, means that East Providence taxpayers are bearing costs of almost $30,000 per year for this one paid public employees to conduct union business that constantly works against the better interests of those same taxpayers.

In Tiverton, there is a minimum trifecta of ‘ghost worker’ union release time provisions.  Elementary school teacher and local union president Amy Mullen is allowed one teaching period per day (20%)  for “union business.” At a salary of over $75,000 per year, the total rip-off to taxpayers, including the cost of substitute teachers, is likely over $30,000 per year. Provisions in Tiverton’s firefighter and police union contracts are less costly, having mainly to do with periodic conventions and meetings, but still may add over $10,000 per year in ‘ghost worker’ costs to taxpayers.

The above examples do not take into account common provisions that relieve union officers of “non-teaching duties” (for example). We did not attempt to value these activities, but exempting union officers likely has a cost of thousands of dollars, either in lost benefit to taxpayers and constituents or in the increased burden on other employees.

Unauthorized release time. But the rip-off to taxpayers does not end here. While it’s one thing for taxpayers to bear the burden for “authorized” release time as collectively-bargained for ghost-workers, it’s quite another thing for these same ghost-workers to cause “unauthorized” release time for co-workers. For instance, our Center has anecdotally been told by numerous former educators that it is common practice for local union NEA officials, who themselves were on release time to conduct ‘union business’ at the expense of the taxpayers, to simply walk into classrooms and pull other teachers (and fellow union members) out of their classes for meeting on various topics … often leaving entire classrooms unattended. In one instance, the so-called ‘union business’ that the authorized and unauthorized ghost-worker teachers were discussing … was to scheme how to get rid of a school administrator that the union did not like.

On the legal side, state law appears to prohibit these collectively bargained schemes. Under the state Labor Relations Act, Rhode Island General Law 28-7-13 states that “it shall be an unfair labor practice for an employer to” give preference to “any employee organization”:

By compensating any employee or individual for services performed in behalf of any employee organization or association, agency or plan, or by donating free services, equipment, materials, office or meeting space, or any thing else of value for the use of any employee organization or association, agency, or plan; provided that an employer shall not be prohibited from permitting employees to confer with him or her during working hours without loss of time or pay.

Rhode Islanders expect their hard-earned money to be spent to educate our children, protect our homes and businesses, or to provide other vital services. We do not expect that our money will be spent to advance the work of overly politicized unions.

According to our Center’s report and this follow-up post, not only are taxpayers grossly overpaying for government services, but they’re also regularly paying out their hard-earned money to government workers who are not even working! Whether it’s paying for release time where union members are paid by taxpayer for doing union work, overly generous vacation and personal days, paying for public employees on sabbatical, paying for suspended workers, paying for years and years for people out of work on dubious injury claims … or paying unsustainable levels of post-employment benefits …  taxpayers are being ripped off.

If public workers want to assist their unions, the should do so on their own time or be paid out of  the dues of union members … not on public time and certainly not on the public nickel. If we can bring these and other public union excesses into line with the private sector, your property taxes could be reduced by 25%.

Ghost Workers – Government Workers who are Union Officials Paid for Not Working – Drive-up Property Taxes

And it may even be illegal …

Providence, RI— One of the most objectionable schemes of collective bargaining contracts with government unions are provisions not found in the private sector that pay workers for not working, that increase the cost of government, and that unfairly drive up property taxes. Even more egregiously, in this case, public employees are being paid by taxpayers to work for someone else.

According to a post today as follow-up to to the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity’s landmark Public Union Excesses report on the excessive costs of collectively bargained government services, ‘union release time’ provisions that allow for “ghost workers” – public employees paid by the public NOT to conduct work for the public; but rather paid by the public to conduct union work – are a major taxpayer rip-off.

In the post, Paid For Not Working; a Taxpayer RipOff; Ghost Workers and the Triple-Whammy of Union Release Time, multiple examples of contract language, as well identification and cost-calculation of actual ‘ghost workers’are provided.

“Worse, this unfair and unjustifiable practice appears to be in direct conflict with state law,” exclaimed Mike Stenhouse, CEO for the Center. 

For example, in the city of Providence’s collective bargaining agreement with the Providence Teachers Union, publicly paid special educator, Maribeth Calabro, also the local union president, is contractually allowed to spend 40% of her school schedule (with an estimated $100,000+ compensation package) on union business. Add in the cost of substitute teachers and the total annual cost to taxpayers likely exceeds $60,000 per year.

The full ghost worker post provides other individual examples and also discusses:

  • The ‘triple-whammy’ on taxpayers, once substitute worker costs are added-in
  • State law on what constitutes and “unfair labor practice”
  • Further abuses of unauthorized release time

“If public workers want to assist their unions, they should do so on their own time and on the union’s nickel,” suggested Stenhouse, “and certainly not at the taxpayers’ expense.”

According the Center’s May 2019 Public Union Excesses report, Rhode Island taxpayers dish-out $888 million per year (or $3500 for a family of four) for excessive compensation provisions in collective bargaining agreements with government employee unions, which may drive up local property taxes by as much as 25%.

Greedy union bosses have corrupted state government, restricting municipal policymakers from governing their own affairs at the local level closer to the people.

Perpetual Contracts Will Keep Rhode Island in Perpetual Decline

Providence, RI— Statement from Mike Stenhouse, CEO for the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity on the “perpetual (evergreen) contracts” legislation that was signed into law today by the governor:

“The number one driver of the Ocean State’s declining population and jobs numbers –  are high property taxes. Our Public Union Excesses report clearly connects high property taxes with the excessively high costs of collectively bargained government services. This new ever-green contracts law will keep property taxes ever-high.

We continue to give an unfair advantage to the wealthiest and most connected insiders of the population, and now these special-interest groups come before the Rhode Island people and saying we don’t have enough … and we want more? This is outrageous!

It is clear today, that after 10 years of the slowest economic recovery among all states, Rhode Island’s political leaders are not fulfilling their promise to help the average family. Instead, by heaping more and more favors upon those who help get them elected, politicians have lost the trust of the people.

Beyond the financial costs, there is a more corrosive impact from this kind of political cronyism. People are fed up with betrayals from lawmakers who have forgotten them, who cater to special interest groups, and who make it harder to live and take care of their families and business – and to continue to reside and work in Rhode Island.

Sadly, Rhode Islanders will now have even less hope for our state, with even less trust in their government! In this case, perpetual contracts will make it much more likely that the state of Rhode Island will remain in perpetual decline.”

Public Union Excesses, the largest research report ever produced by the Center, details how Ocean State taxpayers are dishing out an extra $888 million per year as compared with their private sector counterparts; findings that are consistent with previous national studies, including a report by the Center in 2012. Rhode Island property taxes would be 25% lower were it not for the ‘excessive’ costs imposed on families and businesses for collectively bargained government services, in providing up to a 27% total compensation premium for government workers.