NO PAID TIME FOR UNION BUSINESS                                                     H.B. 4059 (S-7):

                                                                                                      FLOOR SUMMARY

House Bill 4059 (Substitute S-7 as reported)

Sponsor:  Representative Marty Knollenberg

House Committee:  Oversight, Reform, and Ethics

Senate Committee:  Reforms, Restructuring, and Reinventing

CONTENT

The bill would amend the public employment relations Act to prohibit a public employer from entering into or renewing a bargaining agreement that required or allowed paid time for union officials, members, or bargaining representatives to conduct union business or otherwise carry out the duties of the union, if the time were paid by the public employer.

This provision would not prohibit a collective bargaining agreement that allowed paid time off for employees in a bargaining unit that consisted of employees providing law enforcement, fire-fighting, first responder, corrections, or public safety dispatching services, subject to all of the following conditions:

-- The paid time off could be used to assist with grievances, critical incidents, or officer-involved incidents, or for contract negotiating sessions with the public employer's representative or any other matter involving wages, hours, and conditions of employment according to the collective bargaining agreement.

-- The paid time off could not be used for lobbying, member recruitment, dues collection, or political or union campaigning.

-- The time off would have to be paid at the employee's standard compensation rate and not the overtime rate.

Also, if the public employer maintained a publicly accessible website, the cost to the public employer of the use of the paid time off would have to be posted on the website.

MCL 423.210                                                             Legislative Analyst:  Suzanne Lowe

FISCAL IMPACT

The bill would have no impact on State revenue or expenditures, or on local unit revenue.  The bill could reduce local unit expenditures by an unknown amount in local units where such expenditures would not be reimbursed by the union under current law or practice.  While the impact of the bill could potentially be meaningful for an individual local unit, on a statewide basis, when compared to total payroll or total local unit expenditures, the impact would be negligible.

Date Completed:  5-24-12                                                         Fiscal Analyst:  David Zin

This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.