![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.489583333333333in"
height="1.15625in"}**Legislative
Bulletin.......................................\............July 17,
2007**

> **Contents:**
>
> **H.R. 980 ---** Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act
>
> **H.R. 980 --- Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act**
>
> ***(Kildee, D-MI)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H.R. 980 is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, July 17, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 980 would create new federal
organized-labor rights for state and local public safety officers, which
are defined as police, firefighters, and emergency medical technicians.

The bill would require the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) to
make a determination (within 180 days of the enactment of this bill) as
to whether a state substantially provides labor rights to public safety
officers. Those rights include:

-   the right to form and join a labor organization, which may exclude
    management and supervisory employees, that is recognized as the
    exclusive bargaining representative of such employees;

-   the right of public safety labor organizations to be recognized by,
    and allowed to bargain with, public safety employers;

-   the right to bargain over hours, wages, and terms and conditions of
    employment;

-   the right to "an interest impasse resolution mechanism, such as
    fact-finding, mediation, arbitration, or comparable procedures"; and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   the right to have the state enforce all rights and protections
    provided by state law and any written contract of memorandum of
    understanding.

If the FLRA determines that a state does not provide such rights, the
state would be subject to FLRA regulations within two years of the
enactment of this bill. In that instance, H.R. 980 would require FLRA to
take such actions as are necessary and appropriate to effectively
administer the organized-labor requirements of this bill, as follows:

-   "determine the appropriateness of units for labor organization
    representation;

-   "supervise and conduct elections to determine whether a labor
    organization has been selected as an exclusive representative by a
    voting majority of the employees in an appropriate unit;

-   "resolve issues relating to the duty to bargain in good faith;

-   "conduct hearings and resolve complaints of unfair labor practices;

-   "resolve exceptions to the awards of arbitrators;

-   "protect the right of each employee to form, join, or assist any
    labor organization, or to refrain from any such activity, freely and
    without fear of penalty or reprisal, and protect each employee in
    the exercise of such right;

-   "if the Authority finds that any State is not in compliance with the
    regulations prescribed \[by FLRA\], direct compliance by such State
    by order; and

-   "take such other actions as are necessary and appropriate to
    effectively administer this Act, including issuing subpoenas
    requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the
    production of documentary or other evidence from any place in the
    United States, and administering oaths, taking or ordering the
    taking of depositions, ordering responses to written
    interrogatories, and receiving and examining witnesses."

Any person "aggrieved" by an FLRA determination under this bill could,
during the 60-day period beginning on the date on which the
determination was made, petition any United States Court of Appeals in
the circuit in which the person resides or transacts business or in
District of Columbia circuit, for judicial review.

Furthermore, the FLRA could petition any U.S. Court of Appeals if a
state is thought to be noncompliant under this bill, or "any interested
party" could file a similar suit against a state in a U.S. district
court, if the FLRA has not filed one.

H.R. 980 would prohibit any public safety employer from engaging in a
lockout of public safety officials. Further, it would prohibit public
safety officers from engaging in a strike against their public employer
and would ban labor organizations from calling for such a strike.

The bill would also permit a state to exempt any political subdivision
that has a population of less than 5,000 or that employs fewer than 25
full-time employees from the provisions of this bill.

The bill would not preempt any existing state laws that provide greater
or comparable rights to the ones listed in this bill, nor would it
invalidate or supersede any existing collective bargaining units or
agreements. States could not preempt localities that provide greater or
comparable rights to the ones listed in the bill.

H.R. 980 would authorize "such sums" as would be necessary to carry out
the requirements of the bill.

The bill contains six findings, including:

-   "The health and safety of the Nation and the best interests of
    public safety employers and employees may be furthered by the
    settlement of issues through the processes of collective bargaining;
    and

-   "The Federal Government is in the position to encourage
    conciliation, mediation, and voluntary arbitration to aid and
    encourage employers and the representatives of their employees to
    reach and maintain agreements concerning rates of pay, hours, and
    working conditions, and to make all reasonable efforts through
    negotiations to settle their differences by mutual agreement reached
    through collective bargaining or by such methods as may be provided
    for in any applicable agreement for the settlement of disputes."

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}**: Some conservatives may
be concerned that this bill would preempt state authority to regulate
the collective bargaining rights of its state and local public safety
employees. While the bill asserts that states would not be preempted,
such non-preemption is only applicable in states with comparable or
greater rights than those required under this legislation. In other
words, if a state doesn't match or exceed what the federal government
wants, it is preempted.

Some conservatives may also be concerned that certain state and local
governments would be required to meet and bargain with the public safety
employees' exclusive representatives of the employees who choose to be
represented by a collective bargaining unit (whereas under current law,
there is no such requirement to meet and bargain).

Some conservatives may be further concerned that the bill prohibits
states from preempting localities that provide greater or comparable
rights to the ones listed in the bill.

Additionally, some conservatives may be concerned that the bill does not
provide protections for individual public safety employees who do not
want to unionize---especially in states that do not currently allow such
unionization.

Lastly, some conservatives have historically been suspicious of , if not
strongly opposed to, unionization for public sector employees (the most
recent example being conservative opposition to the employees of the
Transportation Security Administration). Collective bargaining and the
process that surrounds it can cause strife in the workplace that might
otherwise undermine Americans' public safety.  Although current law
already prohibits strikes in the public sector (including education),
such prohibition has at times been violated during the collective
bargaining process. 

**[Additional Statement of Concern]{.underline}**: To read a statement
from Rep. John Boehner expressing similar concerns to this legislation
back in 2000, visit this webpage:
<http://republicans.edlabor.house.gov/archive/hearings/106th/eer/pubsafety5900/osboehner.htm>.

**[Administration Position]{.underline}**: A Statement of Administration
Policy (SAP) was not available at press time.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 980 was introduced on February
12, 2007 and referred Committee on Education and Labor. On June 5, 2007,
the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor,
and Pensions, which held a hearing on the bill the same day. On June 20,
2007, the bill was marked up by the full committee and reported, as
amended, by a vote of 42 -- 1. On July 12, 2007, the bill was placed on
the House calendar.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, the bill would
authorize \$3 million in FY2008 and \$45 million over the FY2008 --
FY2012 period to account for the administrative costs for FLRA to create
and adopt the public safety labor regulations.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of Government?]{.underline}**
Yes, the bill would preempt state and local authorities in various
instances and require FLRA to create regulations and oversee state labor
organizations.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}** Yes. It would preempt state
authority to regulate collective bargaining rights of public safety
employees. Also, it would require states, as employers, to meet and
collectively bargain with public safety officials. The bill would also
require state or local governments to testify, if subpoenaed, regarding
FLRA's enforcement of collective bargaining system and would prevent
public sector employers from engaging in lockouts.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}**: Though the bill
contains no earmarks, and the Education Committee verifies this in a
statement in the accompanying committee report, the earmarks rule (House
Rule XXI, Clause 9(a)) does not apply, by definition, to legislation
considered under suspension of the rules.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The accompanying committee
report,
[110-232](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr232)),
cites constitutional authority in Article 1, Section 8, but fails to
cite a specific clause.

**[Outside Organizations]{.underline}**: H.R. 980 is being
[supported]{.underline} by such organizations as:

-   International Association of Fire Fighters;

-   Fraternal Order of Police;

-   International Union of Police Associations; and

-   National Association of Police Organizations.

H.R. 980 is being [opposed]{.underline} by such organizations as:

-   National Right to Work; and

-   The National League of Cities.

**[RSC Staff Contacts]{.underline}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717; and

Paul Teller; <paul.teller@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9718.

**\###**