An Overview of the AFSCME Bargaining Agreement
The AFSCME bargaining agreement is a contract between the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and the public employer. It is a legally binding document that lays out the terms and conditions of employment for unionized workers, including policies related to pay, benefits, holidays, and other employee rights and responsibilities. The agreement also addresses workplace rules and conditions, as well as grievance procedures. The AFSCME bargaining agreement serves a dual purpose. It protects the rights of workers by establishing fair policies and procedures that must be followed by the employer , while also providing AFSCME with the framework to hold the employer accountable for following the law and abiding by the agreement. The significance of the AFSCME bargaining agreement cannot be overstated. It provides essential protections to workers, and helps ensure that the employer follows the law. Without the agreement, the employer has much more freedom to set policies, rules and workplace conditions as it sees fit. That means the employees may not be treated fairly, or even at all. The AFSCME bargaining agreement is important for the public because it helps ensure that public employees are treated fairly, lawfully and equitably. By laying out specific rules and policies in a legally binding contract, the agreement provides an efficient framework through which employees may hold the employer accountable for its actions.
Essentials of the AFSCME Collective Agreement
The key components of an AFSCME bargaining agreement usually include the following provisions:
- Wage and Salary Provisions. Wage and salary provisions set forth the rates of pay for various job classifications and the frequency of pay increases. Some contracts include cost-of-living provisions that provide wage increases pegged to fluctuations in a specified index.
- Hours of Work and Working Conditions. These provisions define the normal hours of work for all employees in a unit and any premium pay for overtime worked. The hours of work provisions also define working conditions, including meal periods and other break times and pay for work involving special responsibilities such as lead pay and shift differentials. In addition, working conditions may address anticipated scheduling practices and the number of employees assigned to specific positions.
- Leaves of Absences. Leaves of absences provisions address holidays, vacation, sick leave, illness-in-family, jury duty and military leave. In addition, under the Family and Medical Leave Act and its state equivalents, employers are required to provide unpaid, job protected leave under certain circumstances (such as maternity, paternity, and newborn bonding). AFSCME bargaining agreements usually contain provisions that exceed the minimum protections required by these statutes, such as paid family leave on an employee’s own accrued time or additional unpaid leave.
- Rights and Benefits. These provisions define the rights and benefits for an employee (i) who is injured on the job (workers’ compensation); (ii) who is covered by employer-sponsored benefits, such as health, dental or retirement plans (insurance and retirement benefits); and (iii) whose employment is subject to potential discipline or discharge (just cause and grievance provisions).
- Dispute Resolution Procedures. AFSCME bargaining agreements include grievance and arbitration provisions that typically define the procedural steps necessary to address the dispute initially at the unit level and thereafter before an independent arbitrator. The procedures vary by contract.
Terms and Negotiation Processes Involving AFSCME
As a part of contract negotiations for the AFSCME bargaining agreement, contracts are renegotiated every two years at the national level. While contracts cover a variety of different topics, such as salaries and fringe benefits (like step increases, health insurance, and retirement contributions), the decision to include these matters is decided at the national level. AFSCME locals choose eight members to their bargaining committee, and more than 100 locals are convened for the convention. There, these delegates vote on which positions should be taken. The positions chosen become the "master" agreement, and are periodically reviewed to reflect current changes or needs. In addition to the master agreement, the locals can then choose whether to bargain additional matters. Bargaining is done by each locality on a local level.
The government unit (i.e., the employer) must also be represented during the negotiations process, and both parties are tasked with putting forth the best agreement possible. The parties begin by exchanging proposals, and each side may then meet and confer in an attempt to reach an agreement, but there is nothing to prevent either party from walking away if they do not agree to terms. All proposals are usually put into writing, so that everyone can keep tract of the details of the agreement.
AFSCME’s collective bargaining procedures is governed by state law. Many regulations are reflected in the Public Employee Fair Employment Practices Act, also known as Act 195. Many of these same provisions are echoed in the Public Employee Relations Act, also known as Act 111. Most importantly, Act 188 was passed in an effort to alleviate some of the potential impacts of the restrictive provisions in Act 111.
Advantages for Unionized Employees in AFSCME
The AFSCME bargaining agreement is designed to benefit its members by upholding minimum labor standards and labor laws. It also ensures certain rights that support workplace democracy. This includes the right to organize, bargain collectively, and take collective action for mutual benefit—without fear of retaliation. The agreement is a must for everyone to protect their rights at work. It also prohibits discrimination based on age, disability, sex, race, or any other characteristic.
AFSCME is always ready to confront, challenge and even fight―us against the bosses. In doing, so they work with management, policy-makers, and all stakeholders involved in collective bargaining to improve conditions for labor. AFSCME believes that serving the public must be valuable and worthy enough to pay full wages, benefits and pensions. They understand that a safe and healthy workforce can better serve citizens.
The collective bargaining agreement between AFSCME and management lays out a number of rights and protections for members. These include the right to just cause, fair treatment, health and safety, contract provisions, overtime, pension benefits, twelve month lay-off and recall, alternative work schedules, leave and parental leave, worker’s compensation, FMLA, and protection against certain discriminatory practices.
Legal Aspects of the AFSCME Agreement
The legal framework surrounding AFSCME bargaining agreements is rooted in federal and state labor laws that establish their enforceability and define the rights and obligations of both the unions and employers. The primary statute governing these agreements is the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which was enacted to promote collective bargaining and protect the rights of employees in the private sector to organize and choose representatives for collective bargaining.
Federal labor law, as codified in the NLRA, is enforced by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), an independent agency tasked with investigating unfair labor practices and ensuring the fair representation of employees in collective bargaining efforts. The NLRB also oversees the majority vote process to determine if a union should be formally recognized and helps determine if a particular contracting unit is appropriate. However, the NLRB does not have jurisdiction over public sector employees.
For employees working for state and local governments, "The National Labor Relations Act does not apply. The states are free to regulate employee rights to organize and bargain collectively" (29 U.S.C 164(c)).
In Wisconsin, the right to organize and bargain collectively is protected under both the state and federal statutes. In the absence of a state law to the contrary, in the municipal setting "the National Labor Relations Act governs bargaining rights." Wis. Stat. § 111.70(1)(a).
In a 1978 opinion letter, the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development, Division of Labor Relations concluded that the language "in the absence of a state statute to the contrary, the National Labor Relations Act governs bargaining rights" found in our state statute means that the NLRA will apply where our statute does not conflict with the NLRA .
With such confluence between state and federal labor law, there are few ambiguities in the legal framework for AFSCME bargaining agreements. There has been some litigation regarding these bargaining agreements, however, that does not seek to question their legality. Rather, the issue has been the applicability of binding arbitration.
For example, in 1985, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that what was called the "permissive bargaining" provision was unconstitutional as it required the arbitration of disputes that went beyond the issues for which resolution was required by the constitution. The decision also found that the binding arbitration provisions in the Wisconsin Statutes made no distinction between issues of a permissive or mandatory nature. The Supreme Court, therefore, held that this binding arbitration provision was an unconstitutional delegation of the legislative function, because it allowed a party to arbitrate its preferred language even though the legislative body had exercised its discretion in stating what was permissible under the statute.
The issues of binding arbitrability, permissive bargaining, and non-justiciable matters in the context of public sector labor relations has continued to be discussed in Wisconsin case law, but none of this discussion impedes the legality of the bargaining agreements themselves. These legal decisions do not in any way affect the ability of AFSCME bargaining agreements to form the basis of enforceable and mutually agreed-upon terms and conditions of employment.
Limitations and Challenges Surrounding the AFSCME Agreement
Despite the general popularity of the AFSCME Bargaining Agreement, it is not without its challenges and criticisms, both during the bargaining process and implementation of the terms of the agreement. Unions and their representatives generally cite issues regarding changes in various workplace laws and employer compliance with the terms of the agreement to be the most consistent challenges they encounter. These arguments are not without merit, as violations of some of the broader terms of the bargaining agreement can only be rectified by grievable, arbitral procedures, which can often involve significant delays and costs. After being dealt a strong hand in negotiations, some employers, particularly in smaller municipalities and districts, need time to implement new provisions and organize the necessary resources to adhere to the changes in the law. The differences across industries and municipalities in the bargaining process, both in size and scope, can also lead to difficulties in implementation of the terms of the agreement.
Because the bargaining agreement provides certain rights to employees and imposes costly obligations on employers, it is often cited as a source of increased employer and taxpayer obligations to fund such things as paid leave and higher wage rates. Opponents of the bargaining agreement, particularly those footing the bill, argue that the blows to the budget are unnecessary given that these rights are often already contained in municipal or district policy. Proponents counter that these new provisions are intended to balance the rights of employees with the budgetary constraints of the employer.
Others have taken issue, particularly at state levels, with the binding effect of the bargaining agreement with respect to certain benefits not expressly mandated by statute. One recent example is the provision of medical benefits for certain retirees who are enrolled in Medicare. Generally, states offer their employees a health benefit package with the promise that the benefit package will continue after retirement. The state of Illinois, for instance, has taken issue with the application of the bargaining agreement provisions covering this aspect and has changed its position as to whether a retiree is entitled to benefits based on bargaining provisions. The State says it will no longer provide free medical coverage for certain retirees who are enrolled in Medicare. For bargaining units under state law, a state could rely on this section of the Illinois Supreme Court’s decision to challenge the applicability of the provision in the bargaining agreement that would otherwise require the State to provide the coverage. All of these challenges to the general binding effect of the bargaining agreement are nothing new, but rather, a sign of greater things to come as more states look to trim federal appropriations to their departments of labor, health and education, with everything from judicial review to executive orders to legislative action being on the table.
The Influence of the AFSCME Bargaining Agreement on Public Sector
The bargaining agreement with this traditional union of public employees seeks to ensure decent work standards for workers while also protecting the integrity of public services. By protecting the right of public sector workers to organize and engage in collective bargaining, AFSCME helps secure greater wages, benefits, and other conditions of employment for long-time public sector workers. This has the benefit of securing knowledge and experience for public sector employers while also ensuring that public services are not subject to the whims of the market. Which is to say, it protects against the ability of government to bid these services out to the lowest bidder, regardless of whether public workers can do them better and at higher quality.
By protecting the jobs of public sector workers, AFSCME recognizes that public services are best delivered by public sector workers. Public employees have institutional knowledge and skills that are not easily replaced. And they are much less likely to be tempted to cut corners to reduce costs because they are accountable to the people they serve—whether in administering Medicare or medicaid, operating the D.C. Metro public transit system, or testing and securing products for the Department of Defense.
Simply put, AFSCME bargaining agreements help both the workers who it represents, and the public entities who are otherwise charged with providing services that benefit all of us every day. In the end, that is good for Minnesota as well as AFSCME members.
The Future Landscape of AFSCME Bargaining Agreements
As the workforce evolves and new legal and societal standards emerge, it will be interesting to see how the AFSCME bargaining agreements adapt. Even today, as unions negotiate on behalf of the public employees, there are increased requirements to demonstrate the need for paid time off, for example, and increased scrutiny over the use of unpaid leave. If employers, for example, have made an effort to allow employees time off of work, it is far less likely that unions will be able to secure paid leave or other benefits for employees in the collective bargaining process.
The impact of the new administration, both at the Federal and State level, will also be interesting to observe . Will the changes in presidential administration affect benefits provided to employees such as military leave? Like the changes in the advanced, it will be important to observe emerging case law and legal standards which may be particularly relevant to negotiations in the future. It will also be interesting to observe how different political and economic environments might impact the use of certain benefits by public employees in the future.
Finally, we anticipate that, particularly in the context of local units of government, the lack of budget, and the willingness of unions to compromise, will continue to increase the impact of the ongoing budgetary issues across local units of governments and the State. Similar to what was seen as a result of the shift in the Michigan legislature in 2012, the pressures of wages and employment benefits will continue to have an impact on collective bargaining agreements in the years to come.