Nevada is searching for a way to balance the budget and one area that I have not heard anything about is in public works construction. Currently, more than 30 states have prevailing wage laws, at their height 41 states had prevailing wage laws. For those of you not familiar with what prevailing wages are, let me briefly explain. In the 1930's, the Davis-Bacon Act came into existence, mainly to keep non union contractors from winning contracts and to keep the local union workers employed. The claim was to increase the disposable income of unskilled construction laborers, for the area. Nevada adopted it's prevailing wage law in 1937 and has been costing the state and ultimately the tax payers hundreds of millions of dollars every since.
I have a personal relationship regarding prevailing wage rates in Nevada. I run a small contracting business in Las Vegas and at times we bid and have even been successful on a few. The Nevada Labor Commission claims that the prevailing wage rates are derived from surveys sent to local companies to determine what the wage that is prevalent in the area. In over 10 years of contracting, employing several workers falling under the classifications covered by prevailing wage rates, I have never received one of those surveys, of course, we run a non union shop so why would they want my answers? Last week, I was bidding on a job as a subcontractor for a small portion of a larger contract and I mistakenly was bidding on the project as if it was a prevailing wage project. This project used no federal funding so was not regulated by prevailing wage laws. When I realized my mistake and changed my wage rate to the normal rate I pay my employees the cost of my bid dropped by 20%. The prevailing wage rates are nearly 60% higher than the wage I pay my employees and my employees make a fair wage plus benefits. The additional cost is not strictly limited to an increase in wages, it also adds to the overhead burden of the employer. We just finished a contract where prevailing wages were required by law to be paid; the amount of paperwork required to comply with all the reporting laws associated with prevailing wage laws required us to hire additional people just to keep up with the hours reporting, benefits, Labor Commission reports, payrolls and monitoring classifications. Like in most businesses, these costs are passed on to the consumer, but in this case the consumer is the government, ultimately this burden falls upon the tax payer. Let me ask you this question, does an unskilled laborer who is pushing a broom on a prevailing wage project deserve to make over $40.00 per hour, how is that reflective of the average wage of a broom pusher in Las Vegas? It is not, I bet most janitors would love to be paid that amount. The reason an unskilled laborer (broom pusher) earns that much on a prevailing wage project is because the union has decided that is what a person skilled in the use of a broom is worth because he has been trained in the safe use and proper operation of a broom.
The inflated cost of labor is costing the state hundreds of millions of dollars. Nevada spends billions of dollars in construction and wastes millions. If you do not want to believe my personal experiences I listed above, the good people at the Nevada Policy Institute did an analysis on what the prevailing wages are costing our state. This is just another example of how unions are costing every Nevada tax payer.
Please see my examiner article for links. http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-las-vegas/more-wasteful-state-spending
Monday, April 25, 2011
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
FDR was right
While I can honestly say that I almost never agree with President Franklin Roosevelt, I did find one area, public union collective bargaining. In fact, the former President of the AFL-CIO feels the same way. Not only were former union Presidents and United States Presidents against public sector collective bargaining, but teacher union officials openly admit that the unions only look out for the teacher, not the student; usually at the expense of the student.
In my last article, I began to explain how a simple Nevada law, NRS 288 has slowly eroded the quality of education in our state. Not only has Nevada law hurt education in our state, but the Department of Education has hurt student achievement not only in Nevada but across the nation. The actual beginnings of the Department of Education date back to the 1860's, it did not become a cabinet level department until 1980. The US once ranked as high as second on the list and has continually moved down the list over the decades to where we are now, around 14th, even though we spend more money than any other country on education. The US Department of Education has a budget of over $70 billion and does not teach a single student. Since the government does not produce anything, the money must come from the tax payers in the many states. The DOE takes money from the states, take their cut and redistribute where they see fit. The DOE is picking the winners and losers. Would it not be better to let the states keep their money and fund their own education? The omission of education in the US Constitution means that issue is left to the states, not the federal bureaucracy. Vladamir Lenin was quoted as saying, "give me a child for eight years and it will be a Bolshevik for life."
NRS 288 is a law passed to appease public sector unions, but some of the sections of the law give overreaching power to the unions at the expense of the tax payer and more importantly the students. The Nevada Policy Institute did a study on the affects of NRS 288 on education, the report does an excellent job breaking down several of the reasons this law is killing not only the achievement in our schools but also helping to break the states budget. The one area I wanted to illuminate was section 150, items that are included under collective bargaining or more importantly what is not included under collective bargaining. NRS 288.150 clearly outlines the items that are mandatory to negotiate like sick days and wages but also includes negotiations on the tax payer paying the cost of union deductions. Yes, that's correct, the school district (tax payer funded) has to pay the additional overhead cost. Section 150.6 states that anything that does not fall under mandatory collective bargaining must still be discussed just not negotiated. This is the area that has slowly been abused, the unions stealing more tax dollars and providing mediocre (at best) results. Unions have also created a atmosphere that strives for mediocrity, rewarding teachers on years of service and credits obtained instead of student achievement. Why put forth the effort when you know when and how much your next raise will be. The seniority system ignores merit and ability and keeps higher priced teachers requiring additional layoffs. Everything the teachers unions strive for is hurting education. Less class time, more prep time, reduced work calendars, higher pay, tax payer funded benefits, tenure, very generous sick and personal leave and the seniority system all work to benefit the teacher at the expense of education.
Please see my examiner article for links.
In my last article, I began to explain how a simple Nevada law, NRS 288 has slowly eroded the quality of education in our state. Not only has Nevada law hurt education in our state, but the Department of Education has hurt student achievement not only in Nevada but across the nation. The actual beginnings of the Department of Education date back to the 1860's, it did not become a cabinet level department until 1980. The US once ranked as high as second on the list and has continually moved down the list over the decades to where we are now, around 14th, even though we spend more money than any other country on education. The US Department of Education has a budget of over $70 billion and does not teach a single student. Since the government does not produce anything, the money must come from the tax payers in the many states. The DOE takes money from the states, take their cut and redistribute where they see fit. The DOE is picking the winners and losers. Would it not be better to let the states keep their money and fund their own education? The omission of education in the US Constitution means that issue is left to the states, not the federal bureaucracy. Vladamir Lenin was quoted as saying, "give me a child for eight years and it will be a Bolshevik for life."
NRS 288 is a law passed to appease public sector unions, but some of the sections of the law give overreaching power to the unions at the expense of the tax payer and more importantly the students. The Nevada Policy Institute did a study on the affects of NRS 288 on education, the report does an excellent job breaking down several of the reasons this law is killing not only the achievement in our schools but also helping to break the states budget. The one area I wanted to illuminate was section 150, items that are included under collective bargaining or more importantly what is not included under collective bargaining. NRS 288.150 clearly outlines the items that are mandatory to negotiate like sick days and wages but also includes negotiations on the tax payer paying the cost of union deductions. Yes, that's correct, the school district (tax payer funded) has to pay the additional overhead cost. Section 150.6 states that anything that does not fall under mandatory collective bargaining must still be discussed just not negotiated. This is the area that has slowly been abused, the unions stealing more tax dollars and providing mediocre (at best) results. Unions have also created a atmosphere that strives for mediocrity, rewarding teachers on years of service and credits obtained instead of student achievement. Why put forth the effort when you know when and how much your next raise will be. The seniority system ignores merit and ability and keeps higher priced teachers requiring additional layoffs. Everything the teachers unions strive for is hurting education. Less class time, more prep time, reduced work calendars, higher pay, tax payer funded benefits, tenure, very generous sick and personal leave and the seniority system all work to benefit the teacher at the expense of education.
Please see my examiner article for links.
Monday, April 11, 2011
Collective bargaining is not a right.
Over the last couple of months we have heard a lot about rights. One of the biggest "rights" we have heard about is that collective bargaining is a right. Collective bargaining is not a right; it is about as much as a right as driving is a right. What is a right? A right is bestowed upon us by our Creator, they are unalienable. Judge Andrew Napolitano discusses rights in his book, A Nation of Sheep. We must first make the distinction between laws and rights. Rights are natural in human nature and our freedoms stem from that humanity. Law, on the other hand, is Positivism in nature. It is created by the lawmaker and as long as the lawmaker is legitimately in power, the law is just. Natural law rejects any law that subverts the rights common to all in humanity. The Declaration of Independence includes some of these natural rights, John Locke, in his Second Treatise on Government, wrote "that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his Life, Health, Liberty, or Possessions." Thomas Paine in The Rights of Man, wrote that natural rights include "all the intellectual rights, or rights of the mind, and also all those rights acting as an individual for his own comfort and happiness, which are not injurious to the natural rights of others." One of the simplest explanations I have heard came from the Wilkow Majority and it was simply put, "a person's right can not trump another person's right." With the above explanations, it is quite obvious that collective bargaining is not a right; there is no right to a job, or right to housing or even medical care. All of those items must be given freely (no coercion, not free of charge) by another, a business, an employer, a home builder or a doctor, respectively.
Why is this important? There have been budget battles across the country, even in Nevada. States facing budget deficits are working to balance their budgets anyway possible. Public sector unions have come under much attack and with good reason. Public sector unions have a special relationship with the government monopoly. Public sector unions collect dues from government workers and use that money to elect politicians that are sympathetic to the organized labor movement. It's those same politicians that then negotiate with the very group that got them elected at the expense of the taxpayer, who has no voice in the proceedings. This creates a cozy relationship that drains states coffers as the unions demand more and more. In Nevada, about 40 years ago, NRS 288 came into effect to pacify public sector unions and force collective bargaining between the government and the unions that represent them. This affected all government employees, except state employees. Over the 40 years since NRS 288 became law, the unions have been usurping power from the local governments and school boards until we arrive at the $3 billion budget shortfall we are currently facing.
In my next article, I will continue to look into NRS 288 and how it is bankrupting the state and ruining education in the Silver State.
Please check my examiner article for links.
Why is this important? There have been budget battles across the country, even in Nevada. States facing budget deficits are working to balance their budgets anyway possible. Public sector unions have come under much attack and with good reason. Public sector unions have a special relationship with the government monopoly. Public sector unions collect dues from government workers and use that money to elect politicians that are sympathetic to the organized labor movement. It's those same politicians that then negotiate with the very group that got them elected at the expense of the taxpayer, who has no voice in the proceedings. This creates a cozy relationship that drains states coffers as the unions demand more and more. In Nevada, about 40 years ago, NRS 288 came into effect to pacify public sector unions and force collective bargaining between the government and the unions that represent them. This affected all government employees, except state employees. Over the 40 years since NRS 288 became law, the unions have been usurping power from the local governments and school boards until we arrive at the $3 billion budget shortfall we are currently facing.
In my next article, I will continue to look into NRS 288 and how it is bankrupting the state and ruining education in the Silver State.
Please check my examiner article for links.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)