Families, educators, food shelves brace for SNAP cutoff: ‘This is a policy choice’

October 31, 2025 by

Matteo Halbesleben speaks at a press conference outside a St. Paul food shelf.

Matteo Halbesleben of Minneapolis is among 42 million people nationwide, including 440,000 in Minnesota, who will see food assistance from the federal government, known as SNAP, disappear tomorrow.

Benny Roberts is executive director of the Hallie Q. Brown Food Shelf in St. Paul, where demand already has doubled this week, prompting staff to put out a call for donations – money, food, clothes, toiletries and volunteer help.

Devina Moore teaches at nearby Benjamin E. Mays elementary school, where over half of students qualify for free or reduced school lunch. She and other educators are trying to keep things “as consistent as possible” for children – 150,000 of whom rely on SNAP in Minnesota – while scrambling to connect families with other resources.

As they brace for the impacts on their families and their community, Halbesleben, Roberts, Moore and others are also calling out the driving force behind the SNAP cutoff and ongoing federal government shutdown.

“Greed,” Roberts said during a press conference outside his food shelf in the city’s Rondo neighborhood, arranged by unions, faith groups and progressive organizations.

“This isn’t a charity issue,” St. Paul school board member Erica Valliant added. “This is a policy choice.”

Sitting on $5 billion

The motive behind that choice, union leaders say, is especially callous – an attempt by President Donald Trump and Republicans to use hunger as political leverage. Why else would the administration refuse to release more than $5 billion in SNAP contingency funds?

The AFL-CIO and 26 labor unions today sent a letter demanding Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins release the contingency funding. AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler said Trump is “deliberately inflicting pain on workers by cutting jobs, slashing food assistance and ripping away livelihoods.”

“The administration could continue SNAP without a hitch,” she added. “Instead, it’s inflicting cruelty on people and treating this crisis as some sick political game.”

SNAP cuts will only add to the pain inflicted on workers during the shutdown.

The administration has forced 730,000 federal workers to do their jobs without pay, locked 670,000 federal workers out of their jobs, threatened to destroy 130,000 health care jobs and sidelined hundreds of thousands of workers in construction, transportation and energy by canceling infrastructure projects.

Pain spreads

As the shutdown enters a second month, more Minnesotans, like Halbesleben, will feel the pain.

He began accessing SNAP benefits several years ago, after a string of health crises – skin cancer, reconstructive surgery and a car accident – left him unable to work. Halbesleben is now able to work part time, but still cannot stand for more than four hours without needing to lie down for a physical-therapy exercise that resets his rib cage.

“My story is my own, but there are other stories out there – people who have families who are trying to keep their kids fed, elderly (people) who can’t work anymore and whose retirement doesn’t pay enough for them to (buy) food.”

He said SNAP benefits allow him to put money he does earn toward keeping his home. He already lost the home where lived at the beginning of his health troubles.

Valliant and Moore said they worry that losing SNAP benefits will create a similar snowball effect for SPPS families, making it even harder to afford housing, transportation, energy and other costs.

“It’s overwhelming to see what our families are already going through, the needs that they already have,” Moore said. “Our youngest citizens are being affected the most, and they can’t do for themselves.”

‘We need community’

Valliant noted that Minnesota students will continue to have access to free breakfast and lunch on school days, and Gov. Tim Walz and some counties have tapped emergency funds to help prepare local food shelves like Hallie Q. Brown for a surge in demand.

But it won’t replace SNAP.

“For every meal a food shelf provides, SNAP provides nine,” Valliant said. “We’d be hard pressed to replace that with donations and good will alone, and we should not have to.”

Roberts agreed, calling the shutdown a continuation of “overt and covert practices that pick on the vulnerable for the profit of the comfortable” – a nod to the political fight behind the government shutdown, which pits tax cuts for the wealthy against funding that keeps clinics open and health insurance affordable.

“We’re going to brace for harm – in community,” Roberts said. “We’re going to support each other – in community. We’re going to do our best, but we need community.”

Looking to access food, donate or volunteer with a local food shelf? Click here for a map of locations across Minnesota.

– Michael Moore, Union Advocate editor

Filed Under: Community, Union Events Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Senators push back against Trump’s union-busting

March 11, 2020 by

Minnesota Senators Tina Smith (L) and Amy Klobuchar

In his administration’s latest swipe at federal unions, President Trump last month gave Defense Secretary Mark Esper unprecedented authority to strip collective bargaining rights from nearly 750,000 civilian workers at the agency.

Democratic senators, including Minnesota’s Amy Klobuchar and Tina Smith, urged Esper in a letter last week “to exercise great restraint” with his new authority and avoid setting a “dangerous precedent.”

Smith, a member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, said Democrats are committed to making sure the Department of Defense (DOD) continues bargaining with civilian workers, as it has for the last 60 years.

“As union members know, sometimes you have to fight to win fair treatment,” Smith said. “My colleagues and I are right there fighting with (union members), and that’s why we’re pushing back on the administration’s efforts to undermine collective bargaining.”

DOD workers potentially impacted by the new policy include janitors, firefighters, food-service workers, teachers, depot maintenance technicians, welders and other professionals. Their collective bargaining rights, Trump claimed in a document published in the Federal Register, could be “incompatible” with the agency’s “national security mission.”

Democratic senators aren’t buying it.

“There’s simply no evidence that this is true,” Smith said. “In fact, my Democratic colleagues and I believe having a unionized workforce actually enhances the security of our nation.”

In their letter to Esper, the senators point out that federal unions have helped expose health and safety hazards at the DOD, and rid the agency of “waste, fraud and abuse on the part of contractors.”

Federal employees gained the right to join a union and bargain collectively in 1962, when President Kennedy issued an executive order. Presidents since then have used executive power to narrow or, sometimes, expand the pool of federal workers eligible to join unions.

But a White House memo leaked last fall revealed Trump was weighing a much more drastic use of executive power: purging the federal workforce of unions altogether.

“Government unions impede the efficiency of federal operations and direct the government to put the interests of government employees first,” the memo reads. “Curtailing collective bargaining in government serves the public good.”

Nearly 500,000 DOD workers are currently covered by union contracts, including 300,000 represented by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE). Everett Kelley, AFGE’s national president, called it insulting for the Trump administration to suggest the bargaining rights of civilian employees, who support the military during wars and other conflicts, somehow threaten national security.

“More than a third of these workers are veterans, and it’s an insult to these employees’ military service and their continued service to their country for the administration to claim that their union affiliation somehow threatens our national security,” Kelley said.

In their letter to Esper, senators note that collective bargaining has helped establish the department as an attractive employer, with fair wages and benefits, and attract highly skilled workers.

“In short, we believe that the Department’s unionized workforce has enhanced our security, not detracted from it,” the senators wrote. “President Trump’s Memorandum arbitrarily and needlessly threatens this positive relationship.”

Filed Under: Labor Voices, Politics Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Tina Smith: Fighting for working families in the U.S. Senate

November 4, 2019 by

Sen. Tina Smith talked with Steve Frisque, a steward with Local 722 and former local president, on the General Motors picket line in Hudson.

Tina Smith isn’t on the ballot this November, but for Minnesota’s junior U.S. senator, the reprieve from campaigning will be brief. The seat Smith won in 2018 goes back on the ballot in November 2020, and the race already has attracted a well-funded opponent in former 2nd District Rep. Jason Lewis.

For working families, the contrast couldn’t be sharper.

While Lewis’ signature achievement was a tax break that overwhelmingly benefited corporations and the wealthy, Smith has a track record of putting working people first, one that dates back to her work in Gov. Mark Dayton’s administration, when she worked closely with Minnesota’s unions.

Smith has maintained those ties in the Senate, where she’s emerged as a leading voice on the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, advancing issues like equal pay and pension reform. She offered insight into that work last month in an interview with The Union Advocate.

UA: Your committee recently held the new labor secretary’s confirmation hearings. What did you learn?

TS: I voted against Gene Scalia for labor secretary because I felt that a person who dedicated his life to fighting for management and against labor is not the kind of leadership we need at the Department of Labor. The DOL was established as an agency that was solidly fighting for the needs of workers, whether it’s fair working conditions, safe working conditions, fair wages, a secure retirement – that’s the purpose of the DOL. To have somebody be nominated who has consistently fought on the other side of all those issues seemed to be completely wrong.

But now he’s in this role, and I will do everything I can to make sure he fulfills the promise of the DOL.

UA: You’ve been active in the fight to protect pensions since before you were appointed to the Senate. Where does that work stand, and what barriers are you running into?

TS: I’m proud to be a co-sponsor of the Butch Lewis Act, which is a practical and common-sense way to make sure people who did everything right, who paid into their pensions, who sacrificed current earnings for their retirement security aren’t penalized.

I raised this (issue) with Mr. Scalia when he came to my office for an interview, and I raised it again during the confirmation hearing. And I’m going to continue to raise it. This is an issue that is really important to the Central States Pension Plan, with upwards of 22,000 Minnesotans enrolled in it.

I tell my Republican colleagues this is an issue that’s not only affecting workers, but also affecting businesses. Many businesses also did everything right and paid into these pensions that now are facing a lot of insecurity… This is not an example of mismanagement or somebody doing something wrong. It is through no fault of anybody that these pension plans are struggling, and it’s going to be to the benefit of all of us if we step in and make sure they get stabilized.

What happens with Butch Lewis is really an open question after the work we did last year to try to come up with a compromise plan. We weren’t able to persuade the Republicans to come up with something, but we’re continuing to try to find a way. Time is of the essence.

UA: So much of the focus in Washington is on the president, whether it’s his Tweets or his scandals. Is there room for action on issues of importance to working families – like an infrastructure jobs bill – where there might be common ground?

TS: I think that the House of Representatives has demonstrated they can move forward positive legislation to improve people’s lives. They passed the Butch Lewis Act. The problem we have right now is that the U.S. Senate is the place where good ideas go to die. Mitch McConnell moves forward nominations like Gene Scalia for the DOL, but dozens of bills that would help working families sit at the doorstep of the U.S. Senate and he refuses to take them up. He doesn’t have do that, but that’s what he chooses to do. He’s turned the U.S. Senate into a personnel agency for the White House, and it’s a big problem.

UA: Minneapolis recently hosted a convention with 2,500 tradeswomen from across the country and Canada. What can Congress do to get more women into high-paying jobs like these?

TS: I had a chance to go and hang out with some of those amazing tradeswomen, and drink a beer made by a Minnesota women-owned brewery. I played hammerschlagen and did not do well, but it was great just to be with these powerful, energetic tradeswomen who are really breaking barriers every day in the building trades, fighting for their opportunity to fill those jobs. It was wonderful that the Twin Cities was able to host that group.

I know that many of my brothers and sisters in the building trades are focused on expanding opportunities for women. We need to especially support union apprenticeship programs in the building trades and other areas, and make sure that there’s lots of room for women. And I think we need to do the work in high schools and even middle schools so that young women are exposed to career opportunities, so they can find the good-paying jobs that are more than jobs, they are careers.

The other thing, since you mentioned infrastructure, I remember the work I did when I was lieutenant governor to get the new Vikings stadium built, and the large number of women trades members who participated on that work site. That’s just one example of the kind of big infrastructure projects we ought to be funding and supporting because they make our country more competitive, and they create such great jobs.

UA: You’ve worked closely with organized labor going back to your time in the Dayton administration, when we watched the tide turn for unions in Wisconsin. That pendulum has swung back. Unions have never been as popular as they are now. Why do you think that is, and what can federal lawmakers do to seize that momentum and help more people win a voice on the job?

TS: Wherever I go, when I’m talking to people, I remind them of the contributions organized labor has made. Whether you’re a union member or not, if you enjoy a weekend off, thank a labor union. If you enjoy overtime or a safe pension, thank a labor union. If you work in a safe job with good working conditions, thank a labor union – and remember the 150 who died in the Triangle Shirtwaist fire.

One of the challenges we have in this country is there has been a concerted, coordinated effort to weaken organized labor. You see it in so-called right to work laws. You see it in the challenges and barriers that have been thrown up to stop people who want to come together and organize for better wages and working conditions. And, I think, as people become more aware of those challenges, we become better able to fight back.

Last, I’ll say the blatant inequity in CEO salaries, compared to the wages regular workers are making, is becoming more and more apparent. We were talking about this … while I was walking the picket line with UAW workers. The CEO of General Motors took home $22 million in total compensation last year, yet UAW workers are fighting to get rid of this two-tiered wage system, which has people working side by side on the line and the non-legacy or temporary worker is making a fraction of what the long-term worker makes? That’s just wrong. And I think people are ready to rise to the occasion and fight back.

Filed Under: Labor Voices Tagged With: , , , , , ,

On right to work and prevailing wage, it’s Walz … or Wisconsin

October 24, 2018 by

Tim Walz, the labor-endorsed candidate for governor, is pictured speaking at a union rally in 2016.

When Tim Walz addressed delegates to the Minnesota Building Trades’ annual convention in Duluth over the summer, the labor-endorsed candidate for governor did not mince words, giving the labor leaders and union stewards a message to take back to their union halls.

“People will tell you, ‘I’m not into politics,’” Walz said. “You tell them too damn bad because politics is into you.

“The choice is Walz or Wisconsin when it comes to organized labor. It’s that simple.”

Walz was referencing the string of attacks Wisconsin union members saw on their wages, benefits and freedom to join together after Republicans, led by Gov. Scott Walker, seized total control of the state’s government eight years ago.

It began with Act 10, which gutted the collective bargaining power of teachers and other public-sector workers in 2011. Four years later Walker signed a right-to-work bill, weakening the bargaining power of all unions.

And last year, Wisconsin Republicans unleashed a pair of attacks on union tradespeople and their quality of life. One law banned local governments from entering into project labor agreements, which establish fair wage and benefit standards on construction projects. Another repealed the state’s prevailing-wage law, which builds fair wages into the public construction bidding process.

But it hasn’t just happened in Wisconsin.

“We’ve got to keep Minnesota from going the way of Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, Alabama, Kentucky, New Mexico – all states that since 2012 have gone right to work, have banned project labor agreements and have eliminated prevailing wage,” said Tony McGarvey, government affairs liaison for District 82 of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades.

Already, the effects of Wisconsin’s anti-worker agenda are noticeable even here in Minnesota.

In Rochester, where construction of a Destination Medical Center has helped create a booming job market for tradespeople, Painters Local 681 rep Scott Parker said he sees an “influx of union workers coming over from Wisconsin,” where they would earn less for doing the same work.

“If we go right to work, where do we go? North Dakota? South Dakota? Wisconsin? Iowa?” Parker said. “We are an island surrounded by right to work. Where will I go to make the money I’m making now?”

Prevailing wage: A case study

No issue better represents what’s at stake for construction workers in this election than prevailing wage.

Minnesota’s prevailing wage laws establish wage floors in regions across the state that contractors must agree to meet in order to win bids on publicly funded construction projects. The principle behind the law is that workers should be able to afford to live in the area where they find work.

Opponents argue that repealing the law would save taxpayers money, and as a former state legislator, it’s an argument Carly Melin, now executive director of the Minnesota State Building and Construction Trades Council, has heard plenty of times.

“We know repealing prevailing wage doesn’t save the public any money,” Melin said. “The contractor still makes the money, it’s just the workers who see less of it in their paychecks.”

The vast majority of peer-reviewed academic studies on prevailing wage support Melin’s claim, according to a report issued earlier this year by researchers at the nonpartisan Midwest Economic Policy Institute and Colorado State University-Pueblo.

The report concludes that if Minnesota joins its neighbors in repealing prevailing wage, tradespeople stand to lose their wage advantage and more. “Minnesota’s prevailing wage law supports self-sufficient construction workers,” the report’s authors, Frank Manzo and Dr. Kevin Duncan, concluded.

By comparing data from seven Upper Midwest states, the report found Minnesota tradespeople are doing better than their counterparts in Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin – states without strong (or any) prevailing wage laws. Because Minnesota still has prevailing wage on the books, construction workers here see 5.2 percent higher incomes, are more likely to have health and pension benefits, and are less likely to rely on food stamps.

Threat to apprenticeship

In fact, rather than driving up public construction costs, the researchers found Minnesota’s prevailing wage law actually delivers significant value to the state in terms of workforce development.

By setting a higher wage floor, the law guarantees local union contractors a fair shake at publicly bid construction projects. And when Building Trades union members are working, a portion of their wages are deducted to help fund their unions’ apprenticeship training programs, which provide world-class training opportunities to thousands of Minnesotans without any government funding.

Without prevailing wage, the authors conclude, Minnesota contractors who participate in apprenticeship training programs would lose more bids to “fly-by-night contractors from neighboring states with low wages, resulting in fewer training opportunities (not to mention shoddier infrastructure).

That’s the reality Building Trades union members are now facing in states like Wisconsin and Michigan – labor strongholds where “we never would have thought they would repeal prevailing wage,” Melin said. And it’s a threat Minnesota’s Building Trades unions are hoping to keep at bay by electing Tim Walz governor Nov. 6.

“If it can happen in Wisconsin and it can happen in Michigan, then it can happen in Minnesota,” Melin said. “We have a lot at stake.”

Filed Under: Organizing, Politics Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , ,

Kera Peterson: Political action critical to defending our basic freedoms

April 27, 2018 by

Kera Peterson

There are just a few weeks left in Minnesota’s legislative session. During this session Republican members voted for a bill that would allow employers to pay less than minimum wage to tipped employees. They supported bills that would weaken teacher licensure, criminalize protest and prohibit teachers from introducing controversial material in their classrooms. They even supported bills in the Minnesota House and Senate to prohibit unions from collecting fair share fees from nonmembers which would be enforceable the day after the U.S. Supreme Court announces a decision to that effect, enshrining a possible ruling on the Janus v. AFSCME case into state law before the ruling is delivered.

Last week the Senate and House Finance Committees put together their omnibus bills, and most of these anti-union provisions are moving forward in one chamber or the other. This is happening despite Gov. Dayton clearly stating that he will not sign budget bills that contain controversial policy provisions into law. At the same time, issues like bonding, tax conformity and pension reform remain unresolved.

The St. Paul Regional Labor Federation wanted to keep union members informed about what was happening at the State Capitol during the legislative session and asked local unions and union activists to join us in the work. Because folks understand the importance of educating members about public policy, union activists volunteered for more than 110 phone bank shifts and attempted conversations with more than 6,600 union members in the East Metro. This work will be expanded on with a series of member-to-member door knocks scheduled April 28, May 5 and May 19.

Many union members have come to think of Gov. Dayton as a hockey goalie defending against a power play. We know he would prefer that his team play offense, and we know that Minnesota’s governor doesn’t have the ability to make laws on his or her own. Because of that, the Regional Labor Federation is planning its electoral work now so that we are in the best position to help elect pro-worker candidates up and down the ticket this fall. The best way for us to do this is by talking with union members about issues they care about, and by getting them to take action on those issues by voting.

We are strongest when we come together in union. This November, Minnesota voters will be asked to choose between candidates who support this basic freedom and those who oppose it.

The Regional Labor Federation is committed to running a robust member-to-member field program that will educate union members about labor-endorsed candidates who support our freedom to join together in union. Our program will include door knocks, phone banks and support for worksite organizing. There will be opportunities for individuals to volunteer and for local unions to mobilize groups of volunteers by adopting a day or night of phoning or co-hosting door knocks. President Bobby Kasper and I invite you and your local union to join us in this work.

– Kera Peterson is political director of the St. Paul Regional Labor Federation, AFL-CIO. Learn more about the federation and its work at stpaulunions.org.

Filed Under: Labor Voices Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Friedrichs is history (maybe), but Minnesota workers aren’t letting their guard down

May 3, 2016 by
Workday Minnesota Editor Barb Kucera (L) moderated a panel discussion with public-sector union leaders, including (L to R) Debbie Prokopf of MAPE, Tee McClenty of MSEA and Denise Specht of Education MN.

Workday Minnesota Editor Barb Kucera (L) moderated a discussion with public-sector union leaders (L to R) Debbie Prokopf of MAPE, Tee McClenty of MSEA and Denise Specht of Education MN.

 

Labor History Month kicked off in St. Paul last night with a discussion of history in the making, as panelists offered insight into public-sector workers’ recent push to breath new life into their unions and defend their right to a voice on the job.

The public forum, titled “The Friedrichs Case and the Future of the Labor Movement,” opened Untold Stories, the labor-history series staged annually in May by The Friends of the St. Paul Public Library, with support from a number of unions.

[Programming continues tomorrow with an author talk at the Merriam Park Library. Click here to view details and a full lineup of events.]

At last night’s forum, held at the new St. Paul Labor Center, leaders of three Minnesota unions that represent public-sector workers reviewed recent legal and legislative challenges to their organizing rights – and talked about the ways their organizations are responding.

Debbie Prokopf, attorney and business agent for the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees, said corporate-backed politicians and anti-worker legal funds seemingly come up with new ways to “chip away” at public-service workers’ rights every day.

“They’re trying all these wacky, right-wing theories to see what sticks,” Prokopf said, pointing to measures that would require unions to hold recertification votes every year and to negotiate in public, or would severely limit the scope of their contract talks.

Such attacks never gained traction in Minnesota, and that allowed many public-sector unions to “become very complacent,” Education Minnesota President Denise Specht acknowledged. “With our state’s strong labor laws, we’ve taken a lot for granted.”

Two developments woke Minnesota’s public-sector unions out of that slumber.

First, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, after making scapegoats of teachers and other public workers on the campaign trail, signed legislation designed to cripple their collective bargaining power. And working people in this neighboring state took notice.

The first Untold Stories event of 2016 took place in the new St. Paul Labor Center, at 353 W. 7th St.

The first Untold Stories event of 2016 took place in the new St. Paul Labor Center, at 353 W. 7th St.

“When unions aren’t able to do their work, then we get Wisconsin,” Specht said. “They’re kind of the poster child now – but not in a good way – and that’s helped us in getting our members to realize what’s at stake.”

The U.S. Supreme Court raised those stakes even higher last year when it agreed to hear Friedrichs v. CTA. The case challenged public-sector unions’ ability to collect fair-share fees from workers they represent, and during oral arguments in January, the court’s conservative majority appeared poised to issue a ruling that would make “Right to Work” the law of the land in the public sector.

‘Don’t wast a good crisis’

The writing, it seemed, was on the wall, and public-sector unions last year began scrambling to convert as many “fair-share fee-payers” into full union members as they could before the court issued its ruling.

The Minnesota School Employees Association, which represents 6,000 workers in more than 60 school districts statewide, set a course for signing up 5 percent of its fee-payers.

Executive Director Tee McClenty said the union surveyed fair-share fee-payers and found many had no idea they weren’t paying full dues. MSEA trained stewards, rank-and-file members and staff for one-on-one conversations about fee-payers’ issues and concerns. And within 11 months, the union had reached its goal.

MAPE and Education Minnesota, as well as unions like AFSCME and SEIU, rolled out similar internal-organizing initiatives, with similarly successful results.

“They say don’t waste a good crisis,” Prokopf said. “And I think Friedrichs was a very good crisis for us in that it shook us out of our complacency.”

Bullet or boomerang?

Ironically, the doomsday ruling anticipated in the Friedrichs case never came. After conservative Justice Antonin Scalia died, the court issued a 4-4 decision upholding the status quo.

Will public-sector unions in Minnesota let down their guard again? Not likely, panelists said.

“We didn’t dodge a bullet; we dodged a boomerang,” Prokopf said of Friedrichs, noting that plaintiffs in the case already have filed for a second hearing before the court. “It’s coming back.”

McClenty said MSEA’s annual delegate assembly last month included a training session on Friedrichs.

“People were like, ‘What? We’re done with this now,’” McClenty said. “But we can’t get too comfortable. We feel like there’s momentum happening at MSEA, and we want to keep it going.”

Even if a pro-worker justice replaces Scalia, attacks on public-sector workers at the legislative level – including a “poison pill” attachment to the bill approving state workers’ contracts this session – aren’t likely to stop anytime soon.

“We’re not going to let up,” Specht said. “This is the labor movement at stake. We’re all depending on each other to be strong. We’re going all in, and we’re not stopping.”

Filed Under: Community, Politics Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Supreme Court ruling a fragile victory for public workers, unions say

March 30, 2016 by

12670636_10154030647976870_1561883592519924421_nThe U.S. Supreme Court yesterday rejected an attempt by corporate interests to weaken public-sector workers’ unions and, in the process, undermine the public services they provide.

The court’s decision in Friedrichs v. CTA is a victory for “teachers, nurses, firefighters and public-service workers nationwide,” said Eliot Seide, director of AFSCME Council 5, which represents 43,000 public-service workers in Minnesota.

The one-sentence ruling, issued by an equally divided court, upholds a 38-year-old precedent deeming fair-share fees constitutional in the public sector. Unions collect fair-share fees from workers they represent, but who choose not to become members.

The fair-share system ensures no worker is forced to contribute to a union’s political activities, but requires workers who enjoy equal access to the benefits and protections of a union contract share equally in the costs of negotiation and representation.

Education Minnesota President Denise Specht said “the Constitution, the law and the facts” of the case were on union members’ side.

“We are elated the Supreme Court upheld nearly 40 years of legal precedent and realized the Friedrichs case was really about politics and weakening the voice of working people,” Specht said. “Wealthy special interests want to make it harder for public workers to come together and speak up for better schools, better patient care and safer neighborhoods.”

Those interests almost succeeded. During oral arguments in January, the court’s conservative majority appeared poised to strike down the fair-share precedent and deal a major blow to public-sector unions.

The landscaped shifted with the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February – a reminder, Specht said, of what’s at stake for working people in this election year.

“This split decision highlights the importance of the upcoming presidential election,” she said. “We need to elect someone who will stand up for working families when it comes time to nominate the next U.S. Supreme Court justice.”

Indeed, the Friedrichs case wasn’t the only hope for corporate-backed special interests looking to roll back workers’ rights and weaken public services.

“Wealthy extremists will continue trying to use the Supreme Court to advance their right-wing political agenda,” Seide said. “The best way to stop them from taking away our rights is to elect a pro-worker president whose nominees will shape the high court for decades.”

Filed Under: Organizing Tagged With: , , , , , ,

In Minnesota, public-sector workers building power from the inside out

February 19, 2016 by
web.Friedrichs-panel

MAPE Local 801 member Victoria Hopwood speaks at a forum at the East Side Freedom Library about threats to public-sector unions.

They may no longer be on the brink of a Supreme Court-imposed Right-to-Work rule, but Minnesota’s public-sector union members aren’t celebrating. They’re organizing.

“What we got was a reprieve, not clemency – and surely not a pardon,” Education Minnesota attorney Meg Luger-Nikolai warned a standing-room-only audience of activists last night at the East Side Freedom Library, site of a forum on Friedrichs v. CTA .

In oral arguments last month, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority appeared in agreement on the case. Most observers predicted a 5-4 decision to overturn the 40-year precedent allowing public-sector unions to collect fair-share fees from workers who benefit from a contract but choose not to join the union.

While Justice Antonin Scalia’s death Feb. 13 may have changed Friedrichs’ short-term fate, the legal attacks on working people – bankrolled by big-moneyed, right-wing special interests – will only keep coming.

Bill Barry is author of “Closing Up the Open Shop: A Guide to Internal Organizing.”

Bill Barry is author of “Closing Up the Open Shop: A Guide to Internal Organizing.”

“Some people are breathing a sigh of relief, thinking we’re all set,” Maryland-based labor educator Bill Barry said. “We’re not all set.”

That message already seemed to have registered with the public-sector union members who spilled out from the library’s stacks last night.

The forum, planned before Scalia’s death, was billed as an opportunity to share strategies for maintaining strong unions if fair-share fees become illegal – a likelihood public-sector unions here have been anticipating since Scott Walker’s assault on collective bargaining in Wisconsin six years ago.

As members discussed how their unions might adapt to survive, there was no talk of letting up just because the Supreme Court’s makeup is in flux. Some even appeared to welcome the challenge.

“I think we can survive and thrive with a new membership-driven union,” said Carol Nieters, whose union, SEIU Local 284, represents 9,000 school support workers. “I think we can turn on its head what others think they can pull apart.”

Barry, who taught at the Community College of Baltimore County, preaches a similarly proactive approach in his latest book, “Closing Up the Open Shop: A Guide to Internal Organizing.” It offers up case studies from around the country in how workers have overcome Right-to-Work laws to build powerful unions.

“We’ve got to revive ourselves,” he said. “It’s no good talking about a problem without talking about solutions. We’ve got to go forward, and if we do it now, it’s going to make a stronger, better, more aggressive union.”

Barry advocated training and empowering stewards to do work often handled by union staff, engaging new members on Day 1 of employment and moving more of the union’s processes – like grievance filings and contract negotiations – into the open.

Panelists included (L to R) John Westmoreland of AFSCME Council 5, Brian Aldes of Teamsters Local 320, Carol Nieters of SEIU Local 284 and Ellen Olsen of the St. Paul Federation of Teachers.

Panelists included (L to R) John Westmoreland of AFSCME Council 5, Brian Aldes of Teamsters Local 320, Carol Nieters of SEIU Local 284 and Ellen Olsen of the St. Paul Federation of Teachers.

After Barry’s presentation, a panel of activists offered glimpses into their own unions’ internal organizing efforts.

John Westmoreland, a former prison guard who’s now assistant director of AFSCME Council 5, acknowledged that fair-share fees “made us lazy” in the past, but he said Friedrichs has sparked a new campaign to sign up 94 percent of the workers Council 5 represents.

“We’re engaging them where they work, everybody coming in the door,” Westmoreland said. “Once we complete this campaign, I won’t have to worry about the Supreme Court justices anymore.”

It’s a lofty goal, but one public-sector union members – and, likely, all union members at some point – will need to meet to keep a strong voice on the job.

“We should make a commitment,” East Side Freedom Library director Peter Rachleff said at the close of the forum. “We’re all going to come back here in six months and see how it’s going.”

Filed Under: Community Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Workers see corporate power grab behind court case challenging their union rights

January 8, 2016 by
Anna Angeles-Farris, a custodian in the Lakeville schools, and Capt. Chris Parsons of the St. Paul Fire Department stand together for strong public-sector unions.

Anna Angeles-Farris, a custodian in the Lakeville schools, and Capt. Chris Parsons of the St. Paul Fire Department stand together for strong public-sector unions.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments Monday in a case with big implications for Minnesota firefighters, teachers and other public-sector workers who benefit from the collective bargaining process.

At a press conference inside the Firefighters Hall and Museum in Minneapolis today, public workers warned that the case, Friedrichs v. CTA, is an attempt by corporate interests to weaken not only their unions, but also the services they provide.

“I’m worried that this lawsuit could weaken my ability to advocate for my students,” St. Paul special-ed teacher Shannon Jax said. “It will make it harder for educators to fight for what children need.”

Bankrolled by the right-wing Center for Individual Rights, the Friedrichs case challenges unions’ ability to collect fees from public-sector workers who choose not to join a union but, as members of the bargaining unit, enjoy equal access to benefits provided by the contract.

“Fair-share fees,” ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court 37 years ago, ensure no worker contributes to a union’s political activities without first giving consent, but require all workers share equally the cost of negotiation and representation.

The system works well, St. Paul firefighter Chris Parsons said, in Minnesota and other states that have not already prohibited unions from collecting fair-share fees.

“In the fire service we believe in fraternity, loyalty, honesty and integrity,” Capt. Parsons said. “We believe in family and in being our brother’s keeper. We also believe that each man and woman has the obligation to pull their own weight.”

Prohibiting public employees from forming strong unions, Parsons said, makes it harder for firefighters to bargain for the equipment they need to work safely or for staffing levels that keep the community safe.

"I can speak up for better working conditions for myself and my colleagues to do my job to the best of my ability," St. Paul teacher Shannon Jax said.

“I can speak up for better working conditions for myself and my colleagues to do my job to the best of my ability,” St. Paul teacher Shannon Jax said.

Jax said her union, Education Minnesota, has empowered teachers in the St. Paul Public Schools to fight back against cuts to art and music programs, and to hold the state accountable for meeting special-education funding requirements.

“Our children are coming to school with more and more needs than ever before, and I want to make sure I do everything I can to help them succeed,” Jax said. “Being a union member gives me a voice in my profession. I can advocate for my students, make a difference and help them get the resources they need.”

Other workers at the press conference said strong public-sector unions help set high standards when it comes to pay equity, earned sick time and other “benefits that everyone needs to raise a family,” retired AFSCME member and former Itasca State Park worker Connie Andrews said.

That corporate interests are looking to roll back those gains comes as no surprise to Anna Angeles-Farris, a custodian in the Lakeville schools and member of SEIU Local 284.

“Unions have made workforces more equitable for all working people. This court case is a clear attack on families who provide essential services for our communities,” Angeles-Farris said. “Our schools, our hospitals and our communities deserve better.”

Filed Under: Organizing, Politics Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Home care workers, clients not backing down from anti-union group’s legal challenge

October 21, 2015 by
Cortney Phillips, a home care worker from Annandale, speaks to media after a court hearing challenging her collective bargaining rights.

Cortney Phillips, a home care worker from Annandale, speaks to media after listening to oral arguments in a federal court case challenging her collective bargaining rights.

A week ago, Francis Hall made history as the first known home care worker in Minnesota to take a paid vacation day. Today, Hall stood outside the federal courthouse in St. Paul and condemned the well funded, extremist groups suing to deny her that benefit – and take away her newly formed union.

“We’ve come too far,” Hall said. “The home care industry is too important to not stand up and fight back.”

Hall was among a handful of home care workers who observed oral arguments today in a pair of court cases challenging their right to organize a union and negotiate with the state for better wages and working conditions.

Francis Hall is the first known home care worker to use paid time off.

Francis Hall is the first known home care worker to use paid time off.

Home care workers voted to join SEIU Healthcare Minnesota last year, after Gov. Mark Dayton approved a measure expanding collective bargaining rights to home care workers paid with state subsidies. Home care workers negotiated and ratified a contract with the state that went into effect July 1, extending higher wage floors, paid time off and other benefits to more than 26,000 workers statewide.

But legal challenges have pestered the home care workers’ campaign, which became a target of the Virginia-based, anti-union National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.

A federal judge in Minneapolis twice rejected legal challenges to the Minnesota home care workers’ union. Now the foundation, funded by millionaires and billionaires, is bankrolling a lawsuit filed by nine home care workers who argue being covered by the union contract amounts to forced association – and a violation of their First Amendment rights.

During oral arguments today, according to Workday Minnesota, a lawyer for the State of Minnesota countered that home care workers are not required to pay dues, making it impossible for the plaintiffs to claim they are harmed by the union contract.

After the hearings, workers said the absurdity of the plaintiffs’ position lays bare the National Right to Work Foundation’s agenda. And it’s not about improving workers’ lives or the home care industry.

“The industry deserves more value,” Cortney Phillips, a home care worker from Annandale, said. “Our union is ready to provide that. And joining the union is completely voluntary.”

The National Right to Work Foundation and its deep-pocketed donors, Phillips added, want to reverse the gains home care workers have made through collective bargaining. Losing their union, she said, “would be bad for clients and providers, and it could push us back into the shadows.”

“I see this court case as a direct attack on women and people of color,” Deb Howze said.

Deb Howze, a home care worker from Minneapolis, added that women and people of color make up a majority of home care workers in Minnesota. “I see this court case as a direct attack,” she said.

Several home care recipients joined union workers inside the hearings to show their support for the union, including Nikki Villavicencio of Maplewood. “We won’t ever let them stop us from fighting for quality care,” she said.

The National Right to Work Foundation’s lawsuit not only threatens to undermine home care workers’ progress, but the progress teachers, nurses and other workers have made through collective bargaining as well.

“The same group that continues to attack home care workers … will simply come after teachers and nurses next,” Education Minnesota Secretary-Treasurer Rodney Rowe said.

Filed Under: Organizing, Union Events Tagged With: , , , , , ,
Next Page»