Times They Are A-Changin?

Congress

In February 2022, the Congressional Workers Union (CWU) announced its intent to seek recognition and the right to represent congressional employees. The CWU campaign received immediate support from Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

The CWU unionization drive is premised on Section 1351 of the 1995 Congressional Accountability Act, a largely forgotten remnant of the Contract with America. Under the 1995 law, the rights of federal employees to unionize were extended to congressional legislative employees. The labor provisions are administered by the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights (OCWR). On May 10, 2022, the House of Representatives passed a resolution approving the unionization by its political and non-political staff.

The effort by congressional legislative employees is not unique. Legislative employees in at least two states and three cities are unionized. In addition, there is legislation in other states to permit legislative employee unionization.

Maine

In Maine, state legislative nonpartisan employees have had the right to unionize since 1999 under the State Employees Labor Relations Act. For two decades, MSEA, Local 1989 has negotiated contracts on behalf of legislative employees with the Maine Legislative Council, the administrative arm of that state’s legislative branch. The current contract expires in 2023.

Oregon

In January 2021, IBEW Local 89 petitioned under Oregon’s Public Employee Collective Bargaining Act (PECBA) to represent 180 legislative assistants working for elected officials in the Oregon Legislative Assembly, a bicameral legislature. The Legislative Assembly opposed the petition, arguing that it was not subject to PECBA, legislative assistants did not have a right to organize, and the proposed unit was inappropriate.

The Oregon Employment Relations Board (OERB) rejected those arguments in April 2021, concluding that PECBA was applicable to legislative employees. It reasoned that the Legislative Assembly had not exempted its employees from PECBA coverage. OERB also found that the proposed unit was appropriate because all of the employees are subject to the same compensation and classification systems and receive the same healthcare, retirement, vacation, and sick leave benefits.

In June 2021, IBEW Local 89 was certified to represent the state legislative employee unit. In August 2021, a bill was enacted amending PECBA to designate the presiding officer of each house of the Legislative Assembly as the legislature’s representatives in negotiations, with the power to delegate bargaining responsibilities to a chief negotiator and a bargaining team.

San Francisco and Oakland

Well before the Oregon representation effort, approximately 33 legislative assistants working for the San Francisco Board of Supervisors were successfully unionized. They are part of a bargaining unit with other municipal and county workers covered by a contract negotiated by IFPTE, Local 21. In Oakland, IFPTE, Local 21 represents City Council professional and clerical staff but many contract terms are inapplicable to them.

New York City

In 2019, legislative employees in the New York City Council sought voluntary recognition of their union, the Association of Legislative Employees (ALE). The campaign was sparked by the City Council’s failure to take disciplinary action against a councilmember with a history of abusive conduct toward staff.

Initially, the City Council voluntarily recognized ALE to represent a financial analyst bargaining unit, which led to a January 2021 certification by the New York City Office of Collective Bargaining. A few months later, the City Council granted the Speaker jurisdiction over collective bargaining. Following a card check, ALE was voluntarily recognized and certified to represent a combined unit of finance analysts and councilmember aides.

State Legislation

In 2021 and 2022, bills have been introduced in five states to grant collective bargaining rights to legislative employees.

In March 2022, the Washington legislature passed a bill to grant legislative employees the right to unionize with bargaining to begin on or after May 1, 2024. The legislation would create an Office of State Legislative Labor Relations to prepare a study with a recommended collective bargaining program. The law would forbid legislative employees from striking, engaging in a work stoppage, or refusing to perform official duties during a legislative session.

Proposed legislation in New Hampshire would extend unionization rights to a clearly defined list of nonpartisan legislative employees. In Minnesota, a bill has been recently introduced to authorize collective bargaining for legislative employees and establish defined separate clerical and professional bargainingunits for each legislative chamber and other legislative offices. In New York, a bill is pending to amend the Taylor Law to define a legislative body as apublic employer for purposes of collective bargaining. Lastly, a California bill to extend bargaining rights to certain legislative employees failed.

Conclusion

Legislative employee unionization efforts raise traditional questions in public sector collective bargaining: unit composition, wages, benefits, job security, and scope of protected activities. Like most labor questions today, support or opposition to the question of collective bargaining rights falls along partisan political lines.

Two distinct issues in legislative employee unionization can be discerned from developments described above. The first is unit composition. In Oregon and New York City, employees working in individual legislative offices have successfully unionized. In contrast, unionization in Maine has been limited to employeeswho perform nonpartisan legislative duties. Another key issue is determining who is responsible for negotiating on behalf of the legislature. In Oregon, Maine, and New York City, the collective bargaining representative for the legislature was designated by law or rule.