2006

LEGISLATIVE POSITIONS

• CIVIL RIGHTS
• CONSTRUCTION
• ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
• EDUCATION
• ELECTION REFORM
• FAIR SHARE
• FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE
• HEALTH CARE
• HUMAN NEEDS
• INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS
• PRISON LABOR
• PRIVATIZATION
• PUBLIC EMPLOYEE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
• PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PENSIONS
• SAFE WORKPLACES
• TAXES

• Tax Fairness
• Tax Equity
• Tax Adequacy

• UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION
• UTILITIES
• WAGES
• WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

The Federation supports fair treatment and non-discrimination in employment by public and private sector employers. 

A person should be judged on his/her merits and not on characteristics ascribed to a group.  When such discrimination occurs, Iowa laws should provide just causes of action and remedies.

We support the following changes to the Iowa Civil Rights law:

• Add a state Equal Pay Act and Fair Pay Act

• Add sexual orientation and gender identity as an affected class

The Federation also supports legislation that gives workers the freedom to walk away from employer-mandated meetings regarding issues not related to job performance, without fear of disciplinary action.  Increasingly, employers are using their workplaces to force their political, religious and labor organizing viewpoints on workers.  Employees should not be forced to attend closed door meetings where they are subjected to indoctrination on issues unrelated to their job performance and should not have to fear retaliation for expressing opposing viewpoints.

The Federation supports adequate funding to meet the maintenance and vertical infrastructure replacement needs of state and local governments, including additional funding for the Vertical Infrastructure Fund within the Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund.

The Federation supports legislation to allow Performance-Based Contracting for public facilities.  Performance-Based Contracting would provide a manner in which public agencies, particularly school districts, could pay for major capital improvements through energy savings guaranteed by the contractors performing the installation of the equipment.   Performance-Based Contracting could be undertaken without the necessity of passing controversial bond referendums, which often stand in the way of updating aging public buildings and antiquated mechanical systems.

The Federation supports requiring above average wages and health care, at least 80% employer-paid, as a condition of receiving any economic development assistance.  Firms with a record of labor law violations or union busting should be disqualified.

These requirements should apply to all economic development incentives, including property tax abatements, corporate income tax credits, enterprise zones, tax-free low-interest loans, Tax Increment Financing (TIF), infrastructure assistance, and training grants, as well as programs such as the Iowa Values Fund and the Community Economic Betterment Act (CEBA). 

To determine the effectiveness of any subsidy, credit or tax cut, Iowa should annually, on a firm by firm basis, collect, analyze and publish the data necessary to evaluate whether these programs are working.  Such data should include, but not be limited, to the following:

• Public funds received for each economic development program;

• Tax credits, listed by category;

• Property tax reductions and abatements;

• Number of net jobs created and hourly wage information;

• Value of tax expenditures.

All economic development agreements that provide subsidies to businesses should require clawbacks, or repayment, if the conditions of the agreement are not met.

Any contracts funded with state dollars and any state-funded development assistance should not be awarded to entities that perform the work at a site outside of the United States .

The Federation supports a world-class education for our children through a fully funded public school system that encompasses early childhood through university education.   

Public schools are the foundation of our strong, democratic society.  Broad-based, quality education is necessary to give Iowans the skills and ability to get and keep good-paying jobs of their choice and the freedom to live satisfying, productive lives.  Public schools provide services to all children regardless of ethnic background, socioeconomic status, special needs, or religious beliefs.  Education of this caliber requires continued public investment.

Over the last several years, lack of adequate funding for K-12 schools has caused Iowa ’s education systems to face devastating choices, such as laying off teachers and school staff, increasing class sizes, and curtailing purchases of textbooks and materials.  Iowa has had a reputation for excellence in education, but funding shortages are eroding the state’s ability to maintain a world-class educational system.

The Federation supports increased state funding to restore education programs cut or frozen by budget cuts, such as full funding for the teacher quality initiative of 2001, professional development, reduced class sizes, and technology, as well as funding to address the comprehensive needs of modern education, including salaries for teachers and staff, infrastructure and technology.

Iowa students are faced with increasing costs to pay for higher education.  Since 1996 average tuition and mandatory fees at Regents universities has more than doubled—from $2,654 to $5,403. 

Between 1980 and 2004, tuition, as a percentage of total operating costs, increased from 24% to 41% for community colleges and from 21% to 44% for the Regents universities.  At the same time, state appropriations decreased from 77% of operating costs to 49%.  

The Federation supports state funding levels that reduce, rather than increase, tuition and fees as a percentage of operating costs at Iowa ’s community colleges and Regents universities.

The Federation supports:

• Spending limits on campaigns and public financing of campaigns;

•  Election Day registration to allow easier access to voting for all our citizens;

• Continuation of the early voting program;

•  Maintaining the right to vote for felons who have served their sentences.

The Federation supports legislation that would allow Iowa private sector and public sector unions to negotiate “fair share” clauses into collectively bargained labor agreements. 

Such a clause would require an employee covered by a union contract, as a condition of employment, to pay a “fair share” fee to cover the union’s representational activities.  This would ensure that all workers covered by and benefiting from the contract would share in the cost of the service provided.

The Federation supports paid family and medical leave benefits for workers who are employed by employers with four or more employees, including the state and its subdivisions.

The Federation supports health care reform that extends access to affordable, quality health care to all Iowans, including:

• Affordable Prescription Drugs for all Iowans;
• Mental health parity.  Although the 2005 Legislature passed legislation covering a limited list of mental illnesses, insurers should be required to cover a broader range of mental illnesses, including alcoholism and substance abuse, in a manner equal to coverage for other illnesses;
• Full funding of Medicaid;
• Legislation requiring employers that provide inadequate or no health care coverage for their employees to pay a fee to the state to help cover the costs of their employees who use state-funded health care programs;
• Safe staffing ratios in health care facilities and nursing homes to ensure that patients get the care they need;
• Limits on mandatory overtime for health care workers;
• Increased funding for home care programs and the right of home care workers with independent contractor status to organize a union and collectively bargain.

The Federation opposes:

• Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs).  These accounts will benefit primarily healthy, wealthy individuals and will neither control costs nor enhance the quality of care.  MSAs may provide an incentive to participants to postpone or deny themselves necessary health care and could drive up the cost of health insurance;
• Limits on medical malpractice lawsuits.  Medical negligence cannot be reduced by restricting consumers’ legal rights.  In fact, the threat of lawsuit may force providers to act more responsibly.  Arbitrary limits tend to deny proper compensation for those who are harmed the most.

The Federation supports:

• Provision of positive learning and training experiences needed by welfare recipients to reach the goal of permanent, unsubsidized employment.  We encourage welfare agencies to assess the skills, interests and abilities of welfare recipients and to develop educational programs that will fit the needs of the employees;
• Funding for high-quality childcare to make it more available and affordable for Iowa ’s working families and also provide living wages for childcare providers;
• Adequate funding for transportation needs;
• Health care coverage for low-wage workers;
• Affordable housing.  Iowa should dedicate a permanent source of funding for the State Housing Trust Fund for distribution to local housing programs in order to meet low- and moderate-income housing needs;
• Adequate funding for Legal Services Programs.

Some workers, who are, for all intents and purposes, employees, are treated as if they are independent contractors.  As a result, the employer is not obligated to provide unemployment and workers’ compensation for them. 

The Federation supports legislation that reflects the distinction between employees and independent contractors and prohibits employer avoidance of their obligations.

The Federation opposes the use of prisoners to replace free workers.

The Federation encourages programs that educate and train inmates to re-enter society and become productive citizens.   Such programs must comply with prevailing wage requirements and have no adverse impact upon public or private sector workers.

The Federation opposes contracting out of public work. 

Private firms have little or no public accountability and are less responsive to citizen needs.  They are motivated to make profits rather than deliver high quality services. 

Contract employers traditionally pay poor wages and benefits, which are not sufficient to raise and support a family. Yet there is no evidence to indicate that privatization results in lower costs. That is because “savings” from lower employee costs simply accrue to the contractor.  

In addition, the state may have to provide assistance for such low-income workers, as well as suffer a decrease in tax revenue.

The Federation supports the inclusion of all wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment as mandatory subjects of bargaining.

The Iowa Public Employee Retirement System (IPERS) is currently underfunded.  The Federation supports an increase in the contribution rate over the next 4 years at the combined rate of 1 percentage point per year.  The current 60-40 employer-employee sharing of contribution rates should be maintained.  Following the implementation of this phased-in increase, IPERS should be authorized to adjust contribution rates as recommended by the IPERS actuary to keep IPERS fiscally sound in the future.

Every worker in the state of Iowa should be provided safe and healthy working conditions.  Employees should not suffer declining health, declining functional capacity or shorter life expectancy due to their work experience.  It is inexcusable that we are in the bottom tier of states in the ratio of safety and health inspectors to workers.  This lack of enforcement allows employers to violate accepted safety and health standards with little or no risk of being sanctioned.  We support Iowa OSHA, whose goals include reducing injuries and illnesses in the workplace.  To help reach those goals, the Federation supports the following:

• The fulfillment by the State of Iowa of its obligation to provide staffing for enforcement personnel as well as providing adequate clerical, technical, supervisory, legal and administrative staff at levels that will ensure the safety and well-being of Iowa workers,
• Minimum guarantees of staffing levels and patterns in prisons and jails, as well as adequate education and other effective strategies for reducing the risk of inmate assaults and violence within our corrections systems.

The Federation supports a tax system that is fair, equitable and provides for the needs of Iowa residents.

Tax Fairness

The Federation supports a progressive tax system based on ability to pay.  That is, if one compares the total amount paid in income tax, sales tax and property tax as a percentage of income, the greater the income, the greater the percentage of that income that is paid in taxes.

Iowa families in lower income brackets pay more, in percentage terms, than do the richest Iowans.  It is offensive that the poor and middle class are forced to pay more than the rich.  It is also an ineffective revenue strategy in that those whose incomes and wealth have increased the most – the rich – pay less.

The following are examples of proposals would make Iowa taxes more progressive:

• Income-based sales tax credits and/or property tax credits,
• Increasing the earned income tax credit for low- and moderate-income families and making the credit refundable.

Tax Equity

The Federation supports treating people at the same income levels equally for tax purposes, regardless of the source of their income.  A tax that hits a wage-earner harder than an investor, even if their total incomes are the same, fails the equity test.

Tax Adequacy

The Federation supports a tax system that generates adequate revenue to provide for Iowa ’s needs.  The past several years have been marked by insufficient state revenue due to excessive tax cuts and a sluggish economy.  Spending has been slashed, and as a result, significant problems have arisen.  For example: schools have eliminated teachers and support staff, state universities have raised tuition, more Iowans are without health care, unfunded reimbursements to counties and cities have caused cuts at the local level, there are not enough caseworkers to address the needs of abused children, not enough correctional officers to keep prisons secure, not enough inspectors to enforce OSHA laws, not enough deputies to hear Workers’ Compensation cases.

A number of changes could be made that would generate the necessary revenue to meet these legitimate needs and at the same time make Iowa taxes more progressive:

• Eliminate federal deductibility on personal and or/corporate income tax,
• Reinstate the income tax rates in effect prior to the 1997 across the board income tax cut.

The Federation is opposed to tax cuts when there are so many unmet needs.  We should, in fact, consider eliminating, or at least temporarily suspending, some of the tax cuts already enacted. 

Evaluating Tax Proposals

The Federation evaluates tax issues based on the principles described above.  The following proposals are objectionable because they violate one or more of these principles.

Tax Referenda

The Federation opposes citizen referenda to make state taxing and spending decisions. 

The role of our elected representatives at the state level is, on behalf of the citizens who elected them, to determine the policies and programs in which the state will engage, and to levy the taxes to fund these policies and programs.  Proposals to use a referendum to set taxes strip the Legislature of its constitutional responsibility in a representative democracy.  The outcomes of such referenda hinge entirely on the ability of interest groups to spend massive sums of money to influence citizen voting decisions through the technology of modern communications, thereby undermining the practice of direct democracy such referenda are designed to promote.

The Federation supports legislation that would allow more Iowans who are unemployed through no fault of their own to receive benefits.

There are hundreds of millions of dollars in Iowa ’s unemployment trust fund.  Employers continue to contribute at low rates.  At the same time, nearly half of unemployed Iowans are not receiving benefits.  Thousands of individuals who are totally or partially unemployed through no fault of their own are denied unemployment benefits due to technical regulations.  Iowa should:

• Eliminate the high quarter ratio requirement.  Currently, a worker’s base period earnings must be 1-1/4 times the high quarter earnings;
• Institute a moveable wage base.  Allow the applicant to use the last four of the five preceding quarters of earnings instead of the first four if they lack qualifying wages.
• Extend unemployment benefits to victims of domestic violence;
• Establish a 30-calendar day no-fault probation period which would allow a quit by claimant with a disqualification and a discharge without misconduct with no direct charge to the employer;
•  Increase the appeal period for decisions from 10 to 14 days;
• Apply current application of deduction of vacation pay to severance pay;
• Reduce the deduction for part-time employment to 50% of wages in excess of one-fourth of the individual’s weekly benefit amount;
• Remove excessive earnings limit of $15.00 over the weekly benefit amount;
• Apply temporary employer contact requirements after work completion as an able and available issue instead of a voluntary quit issue.

The Federation opposes the use of unemployment trust fund money or the interest generated by the fund for anything other than unemployment benefits to unemployed Iowans.

The Federation opposes any takeovers of the gas, electric, and telecommunications utility systems that negatively impact workers.  The Federation supports existing bargaining units, current providers of utility services that employ union men and women, and the maintenance of good, negotiated wages, benefits and working conditions for all workers in the gas, electric and telecommunications utility services. 

The Federation supports increasing the Iowa minimum wage and protecting its value by indexing it to inflation.

The current minimum wage, which has remained at $5.15 an hour since September 1997, is inadequate. Minimum wage workers have already lost all of the gains from the 1997 increase.  For eight years, the value of the minimum wage has eroded due to the effects of inflation.  If the minimum wage had just kept pace with inflation since 1968 when it was $1.60 an hour, it would be $8.88 today.

The current minimum wage leaves a family of three 33 percent below the poverty level for a family of three ($16,090); in 1969 the minimum wage ($1.60) was 114% of the poverty level ($2,924), after adjusting for inflation.  If the minimum wage were raised to $7.25, over 87,400 Iowans would benefit directly.

Both Congressional and Legislative leaders argued that their salaries were not keeping up with the cost of inflation. 

• Congress has raised its salaries seven times since 1997, from $133,600 to $165,180, effective January 1, 2006,
• The Iowa Legislature voted to raise its wages in 2005, from $20,120 in 1997 to $25,000 in 2007 – a 24% increase.  In addition they raised their “expense of office” payment from $200 per month to $300 per month.  On top of that, legislators outside of Polk County will receive an increase in per diem from $86 to a federally-set level, which is currently $117 per calendar day

Keeping up with the cost of living is far more difficult for families who work full time at the minimum wage and still live below the poverty level.

Sixteen states, as of August 1, 2005, have set their state minimum wage above the federal minimum wage: Alaska, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.  New Jersey has passed a minimum wage increase that will take effect January 1, 2006.  Forty-four percent of the country’s workforce works in states with a minimum wage higher than the federal level of $5.15 per hour.

The Federation supports:

• Employee choice of doctor.  A basic tenet of adequate health care is the right of individuals to choose their medical providers.  This tenet is violated by Iowa Workers’ Compensation law, which gives the employer the right to choose the medical provider for an injured worker. Injured workers are concerned that in some instances their well-being is compromised by employer-chosen providers.
• Development of a program of vocational rehabilitation that provides adequate compensation for injured workers while undergoing rehabilitation and that results in meaningful employment for injured workers who complete the program.
• Funding for additional Workers’ Compensation Division staff to provide a reasonable time frame for resolution of disputed cases.  Over the past several years division staff has been cut from 34 to 24.  Similar size states have five times as much staff.  In 2005 disputed cases (not including appeals) took an average of over 570 days to resolve, from filing of the petition to date of decision.   Decisions on cases appealed to the Commissioner take at least another 60 days.   Such delay is longer than in most other states and “starves out” sick and injured workers, who, out of necessity, are forced to settle for less than their rightful benefits under the workers’ compensation laws.  This is unacceptable.  Justice delayed is justice denied.
• Repealing the apportionment legislation enacted in 2004 that:  (1) effectively eliminates consideration of the effects of prior injuries sustained by a multiply injured worker in determining the extent of an employee’s industrial disability due to a current injury and (2) reduces an injured worker’s industrial disability from a current injury, when it is enhanced by congenital health problems.  The law cuts workers’ compensation benefits, unfairly fails to compensate injured workers fully for their losses and unjustly allows employers to escape responsibility from paying for the full effects of work-related injuries sustained by their employees.

The Federation opposes increasing the fee that claimants must pay to file for a hearing on contested workers’ compensation cases.