Michigan Ballot Proposal 12-2
A Proposal to Amend the State Constitution Regarding Collective Bargaining
Shawn Hughes
Honors 192
Professor Frances
14 October 2012
Hughes 2
Outline
I.
Introduction
a.
Outline the contents of Proposal 12-2
i. Constitutional right to bargain collectively, restricts current and future laws that affect
workers’ ability to bargain collectively, etc.
b.
Thesis- These changes to the constitution are quite radical and could have severe
consequences to the people of Michigan, and that is why on election day in November, the
people should vote ‘No’ on Prop 2.
II.
Body
a.
Provide reasons as to why Proposal 2 is a bad thing
i. Reverses the economic progress that Michigan has accomplished by repealing
reforms that protect taxpayers, e.g. pension and public workers’ health care.
ii. The quality of education would be worsened by the institution of the step pay system
which would stress the importance of tenure of teachers rather than their ability to
teach. Also laws regarding discipline, layoffs, and performance reviews will be
repealed.
iii. Repealing of the right-to-work laws that protect workers from having to join unions.
This requirement takes away the people’s right to choose.
b. Overview of the reasons why people would vote in favor of Proposal 2.
i.
The establishment of the people’s right to form unions.
ii. Unions allow for workers to negotiate with the employers for better equipment,
conditions, hours, and wages.
Hughes 3
iii. Gives the workers a voice at the negotiating tables which protects them and their
families.
c. Counter the arguments in favor of Proposal 2
i. Those in favor of the proposal tend to focus on the collective bargaining aspect, but
the proposal is a Trojan horse that also gives union bosses a lot more power.
ii. Proposal 2 will give the union bosses the extra power by restricting the legislative
power of the state government by inhibiting their ability on making laws regarding
unions and their policies created by collective bargaining.
III.
Conclusion
a. Collective bargaining is a powerful concept because it provides workers an opportunity to
have leverage to get proper equipment, reasonable wages, etc. However, too much power is
given to the union bosses which takes power away from Michigan’s elected officials,
which takes away from the people’s power. Also Proposal 2 will slow down Michigan’s
economic recovery by repealing reforms that protect the taxpayers and will cost the state
billions of dollars. So when the time comes to vote in November, the people should vote
‘No’ on 2
Hughes 4
Arthur Hughes
Professor Frances
Hon 192H
14 October 2012
Michigan Ballot: Proposal 12-2
Voting day 2012 will be the most important day of the year for most Americans. Not
only will many Americans be voting on whether to give Obama four more years, but they will
also be voting on many new laws and amendments for their states’ constitution. A controversial
proposal on the Michigan ballot this year is Proposal 2, which will amend the state constitution
in regards to collective bargaining. The Detroit Free Press summarizes the proposal by
mentioning the key points including: granting public and private employees the constitutional
right to organize and bargain collectively through labor unions, invalidating existing or future
state or local laws that limit the ability to join unions and bargain collectively, and overriding
state laws that regulate hours and conditions of employment to the extent that those laws conflict
with collective bargaining agreements. These changes to the constitution are quite radical and
could have severe consequences to the people of Michigan, and that is why when election day
comes in November, the people should vote ‘No’ on Prop 2.
In recent times, Michigan has turned itself around and is on its way to economic
recovery. In fact, Bloomberg reports that Michigan’s economic recovery is the second fastest in
the nation, only behind North Dakota by analyzing real estate, jobs, taxes, and stock prices data
(Berman). However, this amazing achievement could be undone if Proposal 2 passes. Proposal
2 will override many laws that protect Michigan taxpayers including repealing pension reforms
that have saved taxpayers $4.3 billion since 1996, according to the Mackinac Center. Also, the
Hughes 5
state could lose $1 billion annually by repealing reforms that protected the taxpayers from paying
for government health insurance premiums (Studley). Lastly, passage of Proposal 2 could deter
companies from expanding or starting new operations in Michigan.
Another troubling issue with Proposal 2 would be the treatment of public school teachers.
The Detroit News says Proposal 2 would reinstate the ‘step’ pay increases that were banned in
2011, meaning teachers would be paid based on tenure rather than qualifications (Clowes). This
pay system neglects the performance of the teachers in the classroom, which is ultimately the
most important aspect of teaching when it comes to providing children with a good education.
Additionally, this proposal will repeal the newly created laws on teacher discipline, layoffs and
performance reviews, according to a memo outlined by the Michigan Education Association
legal department (Bouffard).
Proposal 2 will also repeal Michigan’s right-to-work laws. Right-to-work laws,
according to unionwatch.org, are laws that forbid workers from being fired for non-payment of
union dues or fees. This part of the proposal also extends from the public-sector into the privatesector, which could deter potential employees from joining that company, according to Roland
Zullo. Only 17.5% of workers in Michigan are a part of a union (Bureau of Labor Statistics),
meaning the percentage of worker membership in unions would increase significantly if the
right-to-work laws were to be repealed. As Americans, everyone should have the freedom to
choose whether or not they want to be a part of an organization, and Proposal 2 takes away that
freedom.
According to the League of Women Voters, people favor Proposal 2 because the proposal
establishes the people’s rights to organize a union and to bargain collectively with their
employers. Collective bargaining will allow employees to negotiate on wages, hours,
Hughes 6
employment conditions, and equipment with their employers, and Proposal 2 will protect the
workers from a retaliatory response from the employer for exercising those rights. Also, it will
protect current laws regarding minimum wages, hours, and working conditions. But the most
important condition for those who are pro Proposal 2 are giving workers a voice at the
negotiating table, which will protect their families by providing fair wages and benefits.
Collective bargaining can be a useful tool and gives workers the necessary resources to
perform their jobs to the best of their ability. However, there are already laws in place that allow
for collective bargaining in Michigan, according to legislature.mi.gov. Proposal 2 isn’t just
about collective bargaining; it is a ‘Trojan Horse’ that transfers power from the legislative forces
to the union bosses (Bouffard). The organizations that promote the proposal focus exclusively on
the collective bargaining aspect of the amendment, which is incredibly short-sighted. As
mentioned earlier, much of the legislation that has aided in Michigan’s economic recovery will
be reversed, slowing down the process in repairing the severely damaged economy.
Continuing with the ‘Trojan Horse’ idea, the amendment will also restrict the state
government from creating laws that interfere with the negotiations between unions and public
employers. This means the elected officials who currently create laws regarding wages and
benefits would have zero say; giving the people little to no say on decisions that will ultimately
affect them.
Proposal 2 is the reason that everyone eligible to vote should fulfill their civic duty as an
American. The people need to use their voice before it is taken from elected officials and into
the hands of union bosses. Proposal 2 threatens the quality of education in Michigan by letting
teachers rely on tenure for their paycheck instead of their performance. But, perhaps the most
important reason to vote against Proposal 2 is the fact that it has the potential to negate the
Hughes 7
economic progress the state has made recently by repealing reforms that will cost taxpayers and
the state of Michigan billions of dollars. While collective bargaining is necessary, because it
provides workers with the tools to do their jobs to best of their ability while providing reasonable
work hours and safe work conditions. Proposal 2 goes too far by giving unions power that
cannot be overturned by state legislature. So, when the time comes to vote in November, the
people should vote ‘No’ on 2.
Hughes 8
Works Cited
Bell, Dawson. "What's True, What's Not about Proposal 2 Ads." Detroit Free Press. N.p., 11
Oct. 2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.freep.com/article/20121011/NEWS15/310110239/What-s-true-what-s-notabout-Proposal-2-ads>.
Berman, Jillian. "Michigan's Recovery Second Fastest In The Nation, Signaling Manufacturing
Sector's Potential." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 02 Nov. 2011. Web.
17 Oct. 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/02/michigans-economicrecovery_n_1072210.html>.
Bouffard, Karen. "Proposal 2 Campaigns Confusing, Polarizing for Michigan Voters." The
Detroit News. N.p., 24 Sept. 2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120924/POLITICS01/209240339>.
Clowes, George A. "How Teachers Are Paid: The Salary Grid." Heartlander Magazine. N.p., 1
May 2004. Web. 17 Oct. 2012. <http://news.heartland.org/newspaperarticle/2004/05/01/how-teachers-are-paid-salary-grid>.
The Daily News. "OUR VIEW: Proposal 2 Is a Trojan Horse." OUR VIEW: Proposal 2 Is a
Trojan Horse. N.p., 4 Oct. 2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2012.
<http://thedailynews.cc/2012/10/06/our-view-proposal-2-is-a-trojan-horse/>.
Detroit Free Press Staff. "Michigan 2012 Statewide Ballot Proposals: The Full Wording." Detroit
Free Press. N.p., 29 Sept. 2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.freep.com/article/20120929/NEWS15/120929025/1001/rss01>.
"Explaining Right-to-Work Laws." Union Watch. N.p., 19 Jan. 2011. Web. 17 Oct. 2012.
<http://unionwatch.org/explaining-right-to-work-laws/>.
Hughes 9
League of Women Voters. "NOVEMBER, 2012 STATEWIDE PROPOSALS." League of
Women Voters of Michigan Education Fund. League of Women Voters, n.d. Web. 17
Oct. 2012. <http://www.lwvmi.org/documents/LWVMIProCon11-12.pdf>.
Mackinac Center. "The 'Collective Bargaining' Amendment [Mackinac Center]." The 'Collective
Bargaining' Amendment [Mackinac Center]. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.mackinac.org/17297>.
Public Employment Relations, § 423.215 (1934). Print.
Studley, Richard. "Opposing Points of View: Unions' Power Grab Imperils Michigan's Fragile
Economic Recovery." Detroit Free Press. N.p., 14 Oct. 2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.freep.com/article/20121014/OPINION05/310140118/Opposing-points-ofview-Unions-power-grab-imperils-Michigan-s-fragile-economicrecovery?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|s>.
"Union Membership in Michigan - 2011." U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 9 Apr. 2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2012. <http://www.bls.gov/ro5/unionmi.htm>.
Zullo, Roland. "What “Right to Work” Would Mean for Michigan." University of Michigan.
N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2012.
<http://irlee.umich.edu/Publications/Docs/RightToWorkInMichigan.pdf>.