by Nat Rudarakanchana February 17, 2013 vtdigger.org A push to give child care workers the legal right to form a statewide union has reignited in the Vermont Senate, and this time, Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell has pledged to stay ‘ neutral’ in the early stages of the debate.
In the last biennium, the Democratic Senate leader openly blocked debate on child care bargaining rights after he alleged that the union backing the legislation tried to ‘ strong arm’ him into supporting the bill with a veiled threat to cut campaign contributions to Senate Democrats. Ben Johnson, the union official in question from the Vermont State Labor Council (AFL-CIO), denied that charge.
Amy Ligay, executive director of the Children’ s Early Learning Center, stands with Sen. Peter Shumlin
This time the debate over social issues that have in the past led to divisive battles on the Senate floor will be different, Campbell has said. As a mark of his new and improved leadership, he promised when he was re-elected as pro tem in November not to involve himself personally in controversial issues the Senate takes up this year, including the child care unionization debate. (Though Campbell appeared to break that pledge last week when he stepped into the fray on the Green Room floor over the end of life patients rights bill ‘ in a long speech, he attempted to sway his colleagues against the legislation.)
Campbell’ s pledge of neutrality on the childcare unionization issue could effectively give S.52 the green light this year as many members of the left-leaning Senate support the bill; the Vermont House already approved a similar measure in 2011; and it has Gov. Peter Shumlin’ s hearty endorsement.
On Thursday, Shumlin renewed his support of collective bargaining for childcare workers at a Statehouse rally held by Vermont Early Educators United, an affiliate of the local American Federation of Teachers (a subsidiary of the AFL-CIO), which currently represents 700 UVM faculty members and the Vermont Federation of Nurses & Health Professionals Local 5221, which represents 2,000 medical professionals. The AFT backed Shumlin and other Democrats in the 2010 and 2012 elections.
‘ No one ever said that change happens quickly, but our time has come,’ he added.’ Your humor, your persistence, your vision, and your plain talk to legislators about why this is so critically important, that help you have a voice in this process, is the reason that this bill is going to be signed into law by this governor this year,’ Shumlin said to dozens of childcare workers who packed into Room 11 at the Statehouse last Thursday as part of a citizen ‘ lobby day.’
The controversial bill, which has divided child care providers, would enable workers to negotiate with the state for higher hourly subsidy rates for services provided to low-income parents.
Supporters of collective bargaining for childcare workers say early educators are undervalued. Many earn lower wages than the average retail worker. Consequently, turnover rates for childcare providers is high.
The unionization effort has been characterized as ‘ nontraditional,’ because it would benefit workers and self-employed child care providers alike. The unionization effort has been driven by Vermont Early Educators United. Another union, the Vermont-NEA, represents the state’ s teachers in the K-12 public education system.
Campbell bottled the bill up in committee last year. He was also reluctant to let Sen. Dick McCormack, chief sponsor of the legislation this year, tack the bill on as an amendment to other bills.
John Campbell, Senate President Pro Tempore. Photo by Roger Crowley
Campbell is still troubled by the legislation because he says it could conflict with federal labor laws. ‘ I’ m trying to stay as far away from this as possible,’ Campbell said. ‘ I told some of my members that we’ ll let them get their voices heard.’
The bill, S.52, allows individual child care providers to collectively bargain with the state on state subsidy rates, which directly affect their wages. Currently the state subsidizes child care for poor families by providing checks directly to child care centers and providers. Workers have also said they want to have a say in the development of professional development requirements for registration and pay scale standards for the STARS program, a tiered certification system for child care centers.
Kay Curtis, who runs her own child care center, ‘ Happy Hands,’ which provides services for 16 children at her Brattleboro home, said the bill will give her a stronger voice in the political process.
‘ Women who do this work in their homes are very isolated, and so what happens is we don’ t have any political power, we don’ t have any voice,’ said Curtis. ‘ Many of the decisions about how we take care of children, which we have a handle on, are made by people who sit in [state] offices.’
Not all childcare providers are on board with the idea of a union, however. Elsa Bosma, who runs Puddle Jumpers Child Care in Shelburne and leads a group that opposes the AFT collective bargaining drive ‘ Vermonters for the Independence of Child Care Professionals ‘ http://www.vtchildcareindependence.com/
told VTDigger that she’ d only support a union if membership was strictly voluntary and no so-called ‘ fair share’ or agency fees were imposed.Bosma conducted an informal survey of childcare workers last fall that showed about 200 childcare workers out of more than 900 oppose the unionization bill.
Although the Senate has passed a bill making agency fees mandatory for many non-union members, child care providers would not be covered under that bill, senators said on Friday. But agency fees could still be imposed through collective bargaining negotiations.
Bosma said that the bill threatens the independence of individual child care providers, who are often sole proprietors and that subsidy rates can simply be increased through legislative appropriations, such as the Shumlin administration’ s proposal to divert $17 million in Earned Income Tax Credit refunds for low-income workers to childcare subsidies.
Children play at the Turtle Island Children’ s Center in Montpelier. Photo by Alicia Freese
One problem with the bill as drafted now is that child care centers may choose not to opt into collective bargaining, meaning they could face lower subsidies compared with unionized counterparts, according to Sens. Ann Cummings, D-Washington, and Philip Baruth, D-Chittenden.
About 14 other states allow individual providers to participate in child care unions, though in six or seven states those unions are inactive, according to Mike Hoyt, a member of the Vermont Legislative Council. No other states allow child care centers to unionize workers. If Vermont enacts S.52, it would be the first such state to do so.
House Speaker Shap Smith backs the unionization effort. A similar bill, H.97, that excluded large childcare centers, such as the Boys and Girls Club of Burlington and the YMCA from participation, passed the House in 2011. That legislation also prohibited childcare workers from striking and removed health care insurance and other benefits from the original proposal pushed by the AFT.
Anne Galloway contributed to this report.