 |
|
|
Question 3: Right to unionize sought for state-subsidized day care workers
A battle between one of the country’s most powerful labor unions and a state child care agency is on the Nov. 7 ballot. Approval of Question 3 would allow about 9,000 state-subsidized day care workers to vote whether to unionize and to choose a bargaining representative. The 1.8-million-member Service Employees International Union has given $750,000 to the Campaign for Our Children’s Future, the group sponsoring Question 3. A spokeswoman for the Boston-based group said most of that money will be spent on TV ads, “to bring the issue to the voters.” The group is also using a recorded endorsement by Sen. John Kerry. The campaign says collective bargaining would help raise safety standards, provide more provider training and reduce turnover. The state Department of Early Education and Care opposes the measure on two grounds: State officials say it would complicate the strictures of state and federal health, safety and education regulations, and would create an unprecedented contract condition between a government agency and private child care providers. “It would put the entire state’s child care regulatory system on the bargaining table,” one official wrote on the department’s Web site. The department says the current system allows care to be tailored to each child’s needs, rather than to the unionized interests of providers. Some South Shore providers do not see it that way. One Weymouth provider, who asked not to be identified, said she is supporting Question 3 because it would lead to “some kind of vacation and benefits.” “Now we have nothing,” she said. She said she takes care of four children, for whom the state pays $133 to $150 a week each for care. Lane Lambert may be reached by clicking here.
Editorial No on Question 3Nov. 2, 2006 Better day care for children - who could be against that? That is what advertisements from the backers of Question 3 on the Nov. 7 ballot say will result if the question is approved. But the issue is far more complex than it appears. The question is an effort to make it easier for day care workers to become union members. The main supporter of Question 3 is the Service Employees International Union, which has spent $1.1 million on the campaign. Unionizing day care workers is not a bad thing in and of itself. But this question is not directed at day care centers. Rather, its target is family day care providers who receive state subsidies. The state subsidizes thousands of children in family day care, and if the question is passed those who work in private homes can band together as a union. Setting aside for a moment the merit of the question, putting labor/management issues on the ballot is a terrible idea. True, collecting signatures is all that’s needed, plus the OK of the attorney general if a legal question is involved. But that does not mean that the ballot is an appropriate vehicle to decide bargaining rights. Family day care is a convenient and affordable option for thousands of working families. And the state licenses family day care providers to ensure safety. But the level and type of care depends on the individual situation. Opening up these circumstances to collective bargaining can only lead to a plethora of regulations and red tape that could well make family day care less available and less affordable. For good reasons, the state’s new Department of Early Education and Care opposes Question 3. The Patriot Ledger shares the department’s concerns and urges a No vote on Question 3.
|
|