Tired of ads? Subscribers enjoy a distraction-free reading experience.
Click here to subscribe today or Login.

Wednesday, June 04, 1997     Page:

Union-only proposal fails in arena of public opinion
   
Unions condemn lockouts when there’s an employer on one side of the locked
gate, and union members on the other. But notice something important about the
current debate over which workers will be allowed to build the Luzerne County
arenaOne side in the debate wants to lock the other out.
    One side in the debate is so convinced it’s right and the other’s wrong,
that it wants to exclude the other by rules having the force of law.
   
One side in the debate rejects a workers’ right to walk freely through the
open gate in order to trade an honest day’s work for an honest day’s pay.
   
But it’s not the “anti-union” side.
   
Instead it’s the pro-union side — the side that wants the county
Convention Center Authority to commit to using only union labor to build the
arena. That’s the side calling for lockouts and anti-worker restrictions
backed up by the power of the police.
   
And what a sad commentary on Luzerne County politics, as well as on how
regressive some parts of the modern “progressive” labor movement have become.
   
The arena authority seems determined to limit construction of the arena to
union members. The effort is in large part a reward to the unions for their
political support of the arena project, authority members have fairly baldly
admitted.
   
That’s discouraging enough. After all, critics of this project charged from
the beginning that the arena would be “politics as usual” in Luzerne County,
meaning only friends, families and political cronies need apply.
   
Arena supporters (such as this newspaper’s editorial board) strongly
countered those claims. This project would be different, supporters said.
County residents could trust the arena authority to keep politics out of its
decisions, and the taxpayers’ best interests in.
   
But perhaps on this issue the critics were right.
   
Et tu, Kevin?
   
Just as important, though, are the principles of fairness and equal
opportunity by which taxpayer-financed projects should be run. Those
principles forbid the posting of signs that say, “Second-Class Citizens Need
Not Apply.”
   
The term “anti-union” used above actually is a misnomer. Open shop
supporters are not lobbying to bar union members, after all. They’re not
trying to set up a police line with them on one side and union contractors on
the other.
   
They’re simply asking to compete. They’re asking to be allowed to submit
bids along with all other contractors, union and non-union alike.
   
And may the best bid win.
   
Unions often speak of their members’ strong work ethic and top-quality
labor. But making a claim is one thing. Proving it in the marketplace is
another.
   
And in the marketplace, competition — not monopoly — is the force that
fosters the best quality at the lowest price.
   
That’s true for cars, computers and compact discs. It’s true in labor
markets as well.
   
If you don’t think so, read about privatization efforts in cities such as
Philadelphia and Indianapolis. Mayors there called upon public-sector unions
to compete with private bidders for street-cleaning and other contracts. The
result: Unions won some bids, private bidders won others. And taxpayers
triumphed as productivity soared.
   
Some final thoughts.
   
State Rep. Kevin Blaum, D-Wilkes-Barre, is the union’s champion in this
crusade. We take strong issue with him here.
   
But at the same time, we continue to respect and admire Blaum’s dogged
determination to bring the arena to life. Without Kevin Blaum, Wilkes-Barre
wouldn’t be debating who’s going to build a $44 million arena. Wilkes-Barre
would be debating who’s going to cut the grass on a windswept vacant lot. And
residents should never forget it.
   
Likewise, we respect the unions for the support they gave the arena. As
mentioned above, we were there in that struggle, too.
   
We simply reject the notion that the support entitles unions or anyone else
to special treatment at taxpayer expense. The unions’ support entitles them to
the same benefits an arena will bring all construction workers: The chance to
bid on the project, and then to help build the shops, hotels and other
construction the arena will bring. Members shouldn’t ask for anything more.