Lawmaker: Some Iowa public worker unions ‘gaming the system’

DES MOINES — A public employees union could be nullified if its public employer — like the state, school board or local government — fails to submit a list of workers eligible to vote in a recertification election under legislation advanced Wednesday by Republican lawmakers.

The bill’s manager said during a legislative hearing the measure is needed to plug a loophole in the state collective bargaining law by which public unions were avoiding required elections. But one Democratic critic called it “union-busting.”

From 2020 through 2022, the state did not receive information on union-eligible employees in more than 40 percent of instances in which a union was required to be recertified by a vote of its eligible workers, according to the Public Employment Relations Board, the state board that manages public employer-worker relations.

That means in 40 percent of instances in which a union was required to be recertified, no election was conducted, according to the board.

Sen. Nate Boulton, a Democrat from Des Moines and a lawyer, said that typically happens when the public employer is certain a bargaining unit would recertify, has a good working relationship with the unit and its workers, and thus does not feel compelled to force the election.

Sen. Jason Schultz, a Republican from Schleswig, however, interprets it differently. Schultz said he believes some public employers are allowing unions to skip recertification elections to maintain harmony with workers and the unions that represent them.

  Buy Photo

Schultz said he believes that after statehouse Republicans in 2017 passed a state law that stripped public worker unions of most of their collective bargaining rights, some of those bargaining units have been “gaming the system.” Schultz said his bill, Senate Study Bill 3158, would address that by decertifying a union if the employer fails to provide the list of eligible employees.

“I believe, and I think the data shows, that the majority, if not all public employers who are not submitting the list are in sympathy with the union and not wanting to put them through a retention election, possibly because they know that the employees don’t feel they need representation. So we have removed the motive for a sympathetic employer to not submit the list,” Schultz said.

The rate at which an eligible employee list was not provided to the state and a recertification election was not held fell to 26 percent in 2023, according to state data. Representatives of labor unions who spoke at the hearing on Schultz’s proposal at the Iowa Capitol said that figure dropped after the law was tweaked through the rule-making process by putting pressures on employers with hearings and penalties.

Boulton called Schultz’s proposal an attempt to break up public worker unions. Boulton noted that in the years since the 2017 state law change, public worker unions have voted to recertify unions at high rates. Over the past four years, more than 700 bargaining units voted to recertify, while only 58 voted against recertification, according to state figures.

“But now, Republicans are pushing (Schultz’s bill), which allows employers to cancel union elections before they even happen. The agenda is obvious: eliminate workplace rights, limit wages and benefits, and bust unions,” Boulton said in a statement.

“We fought against the Republican union-busting agenda in 2017, filling the Capitol with workers and debating the bill all through the night. We won’t let them make another anti-worker power grab without a fight,” Boulton’s statement said. “We know Iowans want higher wages, better workplace protections, and a higher quality of life — not weaker laws and fewer rights. Now is the time for Iowans to stand up and speak out against Republican politicians’ anti-worker agenda.”

Schultz, after Wednesday’s hearing, insisted his intention is not to break up public employee unions, but to ensure compliance with state law. He noted that, under the proposal, if an employer fails to submit the list of union-eligible workers, the bargaining unit can ask the state courts to compel the employer to comply.

“My intent is not to beat up or beat down on any further (bargaining) units. But I want this loophole closed because I do believe labor organizations are gaming the system,” Schultz said.

Schultz and fellow Republican Sen. Adrian Dickey, of Packwood, signed off on advancing the bill out of subcommittee Wednesday, making it eligible for consideration by the full Senate Workforce Committee. The third legislator on the subcommittee panel, Democratic Sen. Todd Taylor of Cedar Rapids, declined to put his support behind the bill.

Representatives for labor organizations representing teachers, police officers and firefighters were among those who spoke in opposition to the bill during the public comment period of Wednesday’s hearing. Some expressed concern that a public employer could put a bargaining unit on a path to decertification by intentionally withholding the required list of union-eligible workers.

Schultz said he does not believe any public employer would do that. But if it did happen, the bargaining unit would have the ability to petition the courts.

The only groups who spoke in favor of the bill are financed by the conservative Americans for Prosperity and the Michigan-based Mackinac Center for Public Policy, both of which advocate across the country for conservative, limited government and free-market policies. The Mackinac Center in 2020 published a report titled, “Top 20 State-Level Labor Reforms.”

Comments: (515) 355-1300, erin.murphy@thegazette.com