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.

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 Refutes NEA-RI Claims about its Cost of Collective Bargaining Report

Unions Respond with Mindless Attacks and Unsubstantiated Claims

Teachers Union Response Addresses the Wrong Points

Correction

Providence, RI— The Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity refutes the unsubstantiated and off-target claims made last week by two government union officials in publicly responding to the Center’s Public Union Excesses report. The eye-popping report details how Ocean State taxpayers are dishing out an extra $888 million per year in providing 26% total compensation premium for government workers as compared with their private sector counterparts, and that drive local property taxes 25% higher than they need be.

Typical of union tactics seeking to avoid discussion of the issue at hand, labor officials try to change the topic by responding with a barrage of subterfuge and attacks on the messenger. 

Robert Walsh, executive director of the National Education Association of Rhode Island made a series of apparently incorrect and misguided public comments when he claimed that Ocean State public school teachers make about $14,000 less in salary than their Massachusetts counterparts.

Mr. Walsh’s statement is off-target for a number of reasons:

  • The Center’s report focused on “total compensation”, while Walsh focused on just the “salary” component
  • The Center’s report compared all public sector workers to private sectorworkers in Rhode Island, while Walsh compared RI public teachers to MA public teachers
  • Most importantly, Walsh’s figures, in his attempt to downplay compensation for Rhode Island workers, do not match with public reports.

In his statement last week to the Providence Journal, Walsh claimed that RI teachers averaged $66,758 in salaries, compared to $80,357 in Massachusetts – a gap of $14,000.

However the salary figure reported in the official Employees’ Retirement System of Rhode Island (ERSRI) report show an average 2018 RI teacher salary of $77,581 – about $11,000 more than Walsh claimed. Further, the similar report in MA shows their average teacher salary (including Boston) was just $74,156 – about $6,000 lessthan he claimed. 

Walsh proceeded to dig himself into a deeper hole when he claimed on Twitter that the Rhode Island ERSRI figures were inflated because higher paid superintendents and other non-teaching positions were included: yet this reasoning ignores that the Massachusetts figures likely also include such positions, which only would minimally change the calculations by 1-2%. 

Per these two reports, Rhode Island teachers make about $3,000 more than do their Bay State counterparts, not the $14,000 less as claimed by Walsh.

Mr. Walsh’s initial statement about any gap could be off by as much as a whopping $17,000. When asked on Twitter to provide documentation for his figures, Mr. Walsh did not respond.

Additionally, the president of AFSCME, the largest government worker union in the state, J. Michael Downey, joined with Walsh in questioning the Center’s donor base and why it is not publicly disclosed. 

“Rather than professionally responding to the findings in our report, once again progressive-union-left leaders seek to shut down open and honest debate by mindlessly attacking the messenger,” responded Mike Stenhouse, the Center’s CEO. “Both Walsh and Downey know that the US Supreme Court has ruled that their is a major difference between government transparency and privacy for nonprofit organizations; and that donors to groups like our Center should be protected from recrimination by the  government or by over-zealous activists.” 

The Center is proud to have earned the support of about 500 in-state donors in support of its core mission to return government to the taxpayers. The Center accepts no public funding and receives no contributions from any out-of-state group that attempts to influence its agenda. The Center’s full donor privacy policy can be viewed here


The 48-page report was researched and co-authored by adjunct scholar to the Center, Dennis P. Sheehan, and by the Center’s research director, Justin Katz. The reports’ findings are consistent with previous national studies, including a report by the Center in 2012.

The full report also includes tables with town-by-town estimates of the excessive total compensation costs of government workers at the municipal level, in school districts, and in independent fire districts. 

CORRECTION: Stuart Peterson, actually the former School District Finance Committee Chair, in commenting on East Greenwich’s $9.5 million excess, was incorrectly listed as former Town Finance Director in the Center’s original media release last week: “The report’s findings are certainly in line with what we have seen in East Greenwich for the last 30 years. Our residents have seen (property) tax increases three times that of inflation, and up to four times that of median household income wage growth.”


Rhode Island property taxes would be 25% lower if not for the excessive costs imposed on families & businesses by collectively bargained public unions.

CENTER’S NEW REPORT: Public Unions Cost Rhode Islanders $888 Million Per Year

Property Taxes on Families & Businesses Driven Up By 25%

“Firefighter Overtime” and “Evergreen” Bills Would Give Unions a More Unfair Negotiating Advantage

Providence, RI– With two-thirds of the statewide burden heaped on local taxpayers, 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, according to a major report released today by the Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity.

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 in providing up to a 27% total compensation premium for government workers 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 residents could save 25% on their local property taxes, while state taxpayers could realize even further savings if public services in the Ocean State were provided at competitive market rates.

“Our state cannot survive morally or economically with this obvious imbalance. At $888 for each Rhode Islander, a family of four is paying over $3500 annually for these excessive compensation deals,” emphasized the Center’s CEO, Mike Stenhouse. “We must find a better balance between how much union members are paid and how much taxpayers can afford.”

The 48-page report, which utilized regression analysis calculations that controlled for experience and educational levels, was researched and co-authored by adjunct scholar to the Center, Dennis P. Sheehan, who is Professor Emeritus at the Penn State University Smeal College of Business, and who taught Finance at Penn State, Purdue University, the University of Chicago, and the University of Rochester. The report was co-authored by the Center’s research director, Justin Katz, who is one of the state’s leading analyst of the state’s jobs market and overall economy. 

Among the primary drivers of excessive public union employee total compensation, up to 27% higher than for comparable services in the private sector, are:

  • The 9th most favorable pro-union laws in the nation
  • A 4-6% base “wage premium”
  • Overly generous pension and healthcare benefits
  • Systematic overtime abuse
  • Numerous collectively-bargained cash-back schemes

The “firefighter overtime” mandate bill that passed the House in April and the “evergreen contract” legislation that passed the House in May would each create new state laws granting additional unfair leverage to local union negotiators.

The Public Union Excesses report discusses in some detail how its findings are supported by prior national studies and also includes a line-by-line budget analysis of the median Rhode Island town of Portsmouth. 

One chart in particular from Portsmouth demonstrates the lost opportunity cost, whereby excessive total compensation payments mean less money to spend on other important projects. For example, the $590 million aggregate annual municipal savings could easily pay for all necessary school building repairs and upgrades in just three to four years, estimated to be at over $2 billion, statewide.

Portsmouth Total Compensation Excess Estimates Portion of Budget, FY16

 The “remaining budget” is what the town currently has to spend a er compensation.  The low-end estimate is most likely to be excess and therefore available for other purposes, while the high-end estimate is least likely to be excess and therefore needed for compensation.

“Treating the 10% of unionized government employees more like the 90% of the rest of us are treated …  is not only more fair but also builds trust that government is looking-out after everyone the same,” concluded Stenhouse.

The full report also includes tables with town-by-town estimates of the excessive total compensation costs of government workers at the municipal level, in school districts, and in independent fire districts. 

Many state and municipal leaders also provided statements that say the reports’ statistically-determined findings match up well with their actual local budget analysis:

Mike Riley, municipal pension expert on Providence’s $110 million annual total compensation excess: “This massive over-payment in the budget directly hinders the City’s capacity to properly fund its critically under-funded pension plan.”

Ken Block, WatchdogRI.com, regarding the nation’s highest-cost for firefighter services in RI: “It is time to bring local municipal labor contracting into the light. A lack of transparency helps labor and elected officials hide the true cost of municipal labor contracts.”

Rob Cote, Warwick watchdog on his city’s estimated $54 million annual excessive overpyament: “… the actual numbers taken from official Warwick budget documents substantiate the analysis in the Center’s report …”

Stuart Peterson, former School District Finance Committee Chair, on East Greenwich’s $9.5 million excess: “The report’s findings are certainly in line with what we have seen in East Greenwich for the last 30 years. Our residents have seen (property) tax increases three times that of inflation, and up to four times that of median household income wage growth.”

Larry Fitzmorris, East Bay Taxpayers Association, on Portsmouth’s $10.2 millionexcess: “The millions of dollars of excessive costs identified in the report represents institutionalized spending borne by the taxpayers that is completely unnecessary.”

Rob Coulter, President Tiverton Town Council on its $7.4 million over-payment: “This high-quality study is incredibly insightful, and is sure to help us as we keep striving for the right balance of having a first-rate municipal workforce at a cost that is fair and affordable to our residents.”

In recognition of National Employee Freedom Week (Aug 19 - 25), and despite the state's attempt to shield public employees from becoming aware of their rights, we have launched our My Pay My Say RI public awareness campaign and our MyPayMySayRI.com website to educate about public employees rights.

Center Launches “My Pay My Say RI” Campaign to Inform Public Employees of Their Restored Rights

Government Unions and Political Cronies Seek to Keep Public Servants in the Dark

Public Education Will Be Biggest Beneficiary!

Many have already opted out!

Providence, RI – In recognition of National Employee Freedom Week (Aug 19 – 25), and despite the state’s attempt to shield public employees from becoming aware of their rights, the Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity today launched its My Pay My Say RI public awareness campaign on its MyPayMySayRI.com website.

The campaign is designed to inform public servants of their recently restored first Amendment rights, as ruled by the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark Janus v AFSCME case. A consistent champion of constitutional rights for all citizens, the Center believes public employees deserve to know that they now have full freedom when it comes to deciding whether or not it is in their best interest to pay union dues; and that they cannot be recriminated against if they choose to leave. Prior to the Janus ruling, all state and municipal employees in Rhode Island were forceed to pay their government-designated unions as a condition of employment.

However, the Supreme Court has decided that because it is their pay, union membership – or not – is rightfully the say of every public worker; especially when workers may disagree with their union’s political advocacy, which is paid for with their dues money.

Case in point is Michelle, a municipal employee in the Ocean State, who opted-out right after the Janus ruling and who said: “I don’t understand why some of my friends continue to pay their dues despite their political views being completely opposite of what the union supports.”

The Center has partnered with the $10 million national education and outreach campaign, My Pay My Say, to launch a customized Rhode Island initiative. “Despite the governor’s and the unions’ efforts to keep public employees in the dark, our Center and our national partner have already accumulated tens of thousands of email and mailing addresses of government workers. We expect to contact them in the coming weeks and ongoing for years,” said the Center’s CEO, Mike Stenhouse. “We have raised enough money to fund phase I of our campaign, which will include thousands of direct mail pieces. The more money we raise, the more awareness we can create.”

The Center believes that public education will be the greatest beneficiary of the Janus ruling. Because unions can no longer force teachers who disagree with them to fund bargaining positions that tie the hands of educators, teachers will be empowered with a stronger voice to fight against ineffective policies.

The MyPayMySayRI.com website includes educational information for public employees, with a dedicated section for teachers, and will soon include information on the political spending of certain government unions. The website also includes a page for workers to tell their story if they have unsuccessfully tried to leave their union or have received unsatisfactory responses to inquiries of their employer or union officials.

“We respect each person’s right to make an informed decision. It’s unfortunate that unions and their government allies do not,” added Stenhouse. “Based on history in right-to-work states, unions will go to great lengths to obfuscate the truth and make it as difficult as possible for workers to exercise their rights. We have already been contacted by workers who were brushed aside when making honest inquiries about the Supreme Court ruling.”

The website further includes links to an opt-out page where an official letter, requesting exit from the individual’s specific union, can be automatically created and printed, as well as links to a page where individuals can indicate that they choose to remain in their union.

The Center’s multi-year ‘worker freedom’ campaign in the Ocean State had a soft-launch in July and, already, many public employees have opted to leave their union, deciding to keep more of their paychecks for their own families. Ongoing, the My Pay My Say RI campaign will include email, direct mail, traditional and digital advertising, as well as other outreach vehicles.

For more information visit the MyPayMySayRI.com website or follow us on Twitter at @MyPayMySayRI.

The Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity has submitted a public comment on the proposed change to prevent portions of Medicaid payments to third parties for benefits. This change would have dramatic results on the home care unionization rule.

Center Submits Public Comment On Rule Change To Protect The Home Care Industry From Attempted Unionization

The Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity has submitted a public comment on the proposed rule that would remove a state’s ability to reassign portions of Medicaid payments to third parties for benefits such as health insurance, skills training, and other benefits customary for employees. 

From: “no-reply@regulations.gov” <no-reply@regulations.gov>
To: mstenhouse@rifreedom.org
Sent: 8/6/2018 12:24:20 PM
Subject: Your Comment Submitted on Regulations.gov (ID: CMS-2018-0090-0001)

Regulations LogoYour comment was submitted successfully!

Comment Tracking Number: 1k2-94p4-ty5d

Agency: Centers for Medicare Medicaid Services (CMS)

Document Type: Rulemaking
Title: Medicaid Program: Reassignment of Medicaid Provider Claims: CMS-2413-P
Document ID: CMS-2018-0090-0001

Comment:
The Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity, a 501-C-3 public policy think tank in Rhode Island, respectfully submits comment in support of the proposed rule that would remove the regulatory text at 42 CFR 447.10(g)(4) that allows a state to reassign portions of a provider’s payment to third parties for benefits such as health insurance, skills training, and other benefits customary for employees.

Our comment uses as an example a real-life scenario made possible by 2018 Rhode Island legislation that was signed into law earlier this year … allowing for attempted unionization of the home care industry. This private industry in our state, which now successfully provides vital services, could be decimated.

This proposed Medicaid Provider Reassignment Regulation Proposed Rule, would mean that the government can no longer aid unions in their attempt to skim dues from precious Medicaid dollars, intended for the care of our loved ones.


In Rhode Island, about 7500 or so private home care workers are already represented by about 45 private-employer agencies as well as by a statewide association, the RI Partnership for Homecare. These service providers do not consider themselves to be government workers and most of these workers do NOT want to become a quasi-government employee.

The Rhode Island Partnership for Home Care, which oversees most of these private agencies, believes that government-run home care would destabilize the industry.
It is also morally unjust that federal dollars, earmarked for home care services, could have dues automatically siphoned-off by state government unions from workers’ paychecks, then transferred to the unions, with some of the funds ending-up in the political campaign coffers of SEIU. If the proposed rule is enacted, it would be just and proper that 100% of the allocated federal funding for home care services should first go to the workers; and it would then be up to the unions to collect dues – on their own – from those who freely choose to join.Earlier this summer, after a major push by SEIU and other progressive activists, legislation that had been on the back burner was rammed through Rhode Island’s General Assembly and signed by the Governor. This new law could transfer control of the home care services industry from the private sector to the government and its union allies. This proposed rule, by removing the government as its potential partner, would create less of an incentive for SEIU to attempt to unionize this industry.At the same time, the burden on state taxpayers would rise, as the government would surely provide frivolous and unnecessary benefits to allow unions to offer a more compelling reason to unionize.

The new law in Rhode Island seeks to lure home care workers, most of whom are now employed under a successfully operating private ‘agency’ system, to register with the government, becoming quasi-public employees, with their names and other personal information then to be turned over to SEIU labor bosses for the purposes of unionization efforts. A very similar approach was taken in 2013 to unionize the home child care industry; since then, union negotiated – and taxpayer funded – costs to support this industry have since risen dramatically.

This new Rhode Island law is a blatant money and power grab by unions that would crush a smoothly performing private agency system that is providing high quality home care to elderly, Medicaid, and other patients; and essentially turn over control of this industry to overly politicized and incompetent government bureaucrats. The training standards and strict oversight now required of nursing and other home care professionals would be greatly diminished.

Implementation of this proposed federal rule would remove the likelihood that government could insert itself between patients and their home care service providers.

The Center also points out how implementation of this proposed rule would create additional synergy with the direction that the nation is now heading, following landmark Janus decision, which would end the forced unionization and fee payments by public employees. As our country moves towards more freedom and less governmental control over our lives, Americans are experiencing renewed levels of prosperity. Enactment of this rule would maintain this momentum by keeping our state’s home care industry smoothly running under private management and away from the inefficiencies of the political elite and their special-interest allies.

Center Warns of Litigation in Effort to Unionize Home Care Professionals

Government and Unions Must Comply with New Legal Realities

As nation moves toward freedom, Rhode Island seeks to increase government control over our lives

Political Money & Power Grab by Unions Would Threaten Patient Safety

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 26, 2018

Providence, RI – The Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity warns SEIU and the state government that it could face legal peril if they do not fully comply with the new federal restrictions expected to be in place this fall, as it pertains to the attempted unionization of the home care industry.

“The landmark Janus decision by the US Supreme Court, combined with the expected implementation of the Medicaid Provider Reassignment Regulation Proposed Rule by the federal government, means public employees can no longer be forced to support the political agenda of their designated union. It also means the government can no longer aid unions in their attempt to skim dues from precious Medicaid dollars, intended for the care of our loved ones.” explained Mike Stenhouse, CEO for the Center.

Stenhouse, earlier this month, attended a national symposium in Washington, DC, where it was highlighted that many legal organizations are actively looking for precedent-setting lawsuit cases if unions or their government allies do not comply with the new restrictions on how government unions may collect dues.

Outrageously, in the past and for now, federal dollars earmarked for home care services, could have dues automatically siphoned-off by the state government unions from workers’ paychecks, then transferred to the unions, with some of the funds ending-up in the political campaign coffers of SEIU. If the proposed rule is enacted, 100% of the allocated home care funding must first go to the workers; and it would then be up to the unions to collect dues – on their own – from those who freely choose to join.

“It’s a whole new ballgame,” continued Stenhouse. “And history has demonstrated in other states, unions and their bought-and-owned politician friends, will seek to bend the rules to their advantage. However, many of us are now on watch, and doing so could lead to serious legal ramifications.”

Earlier this summer, after a major push by SEIU and other progressive activists, legislation  was rammed through the General Assembly and signed by the Governor, that would transfer control of the home care services industry from the private sector to the government and its union allies.

The legislation would seek to lure home care workers, most of whom are now employed under a successfully operating private ‘agency’ system, to register with the government, becoming quasi-public employees, with their names and other personal information then to be turned over to SEIU labor bosses for the purposes of unionization efforts. A very similar approach was taken in 2013 to unionize the home child care industry; since then, union negotiated – and taxpayer funded – costs to support this industry have risen dramatically.

The Rhode Island Partnership for Home Care, which oversees most of these private agencies, believes that government-run home care would destabilize the industry.

“This is a blatant money and power grab by unions that would crush a smoothly performing private agency system that is providing high quality home care to elderly, Medicaid, and other patients; and essentially turn over control of this industry to overly politicized and incompetent government bureaucrats,”said Stenhouse in June. “The training standards and strict oversight now required of nursing and other home care professionals would be greatly diminished. Why would we want to put government in between patients and their home care service providers?”

The Center also pointed out the incongruity of this legislation and the direction that the nation is heading, following landmark Janus decision, which would end the forced unionization and fee payments of public employees. “Once again, while America is moving towards more freedom and less governmental control over our lives, Rhode Island wants to move in the opposite direction, consolidating centralized-control and planning under the political elite and their special-interest allies,” concluded Stenhouse.

The Janus case could provide right-to-work protection for all public employees in the country. Right-to-work means a union cannot get a worker fired for not paying dues or fees.

STATEMENT: Center Applauds SCOTUS Ruling on Janus case; Public Education to Benefit

More Worker Freedom From Janus Case Will Lead to Reduction in Union Power

Public Education Should be Greatest Beneficiary of Janus Case

Providence, RI — According to the Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity, today’s landmark decision in the Janus case, which grants workplace freedom to public employees, means that public unions will have significantly less power and money to block legislation and influence elections. “The greatest public benefit will be improvement in public education,” said Mike Stenhouse, the Center’s CEO. “Many education reforms that would improve schools in disadvantaged communities are prevented by union collective bargaining agreements. If unions are no longer able to force teachers who disagree with them to fund their bargaining positions, unions will have less power to impose ineffective policies into contracts.”

#WorkerFreedom