California’s government unions have been funding political campaigns for decades, resulting in politicians rubber-stamping union demands, which has had catastrophic consequences for education, fire safety, health care, infrastructure, housing, cost of living, taxes, and crime. Now, lawmakers are poised to give even more power to government-union leaders with State Senator Tom Umberg’s Senate Constitutional Amendment 7. The amendment would create a constitutional right to “economic well-being” for government workers and prohibit state and local officials from taking any action that interferes with employees’ right to organize and bargain collectively. Lawyers representing public employees could argue that a decision to close a school, end a failed program for the homeless, or build a road with nonunion labor would interfere with their union’s constitutional protections.
The bill has been met with criticism, with former state senator John Moorlach stating that “democracy is gone if this passes.” Jason Pengel, chairman of the board of Associated Builders and Contractors, warned that SCA 7 would have a major negative impact on the state’s housing, environmental, and economic goals. Michael J. Lotito, an attorney at Littler Mendelson who is an expert on California employment law, said that the bill would give public-sector unions the most exhaustive power of any branch of government.
Despite the criticism, backers of the bill have signaled they have the votes they need to take their first steps in the legislature. In a matter of hours, the bill acquired more than 30 co-sponsors. If the bill passes, it will require the approval of two-thirds of the members in each chamber before it is placed on the statewide ballot, presumably in the March 2024 statewide primary election.
However, the bill’s noise-to-signal ratio will make it almost incomprehensible to the average voter. The bill’s misleading title, “The Right to Organize and Negotiate Act,” has nothing to do with organizing or negotiating, rights already established in state and federal law. The new “constitutional right” elevates a public worker’s “right to economic well-being at work” to the same status as free speech, freedom of religion, and rights against unlawful search and seizure.
Labor experts predict that enforcement will fall under the California Private Attorneys General Act, which has led to legal harassment of business owners alleged to have violated any number of state and federal versions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Proposition 65, and workplace-harassment claims. If SCA 7 passes, Moorlach predicts that California’s economy will be based on just two functions: “In a good economy, government will hire more employees. In a bad economy, with tax revenue falling, government will simply have to raise taxes on the populace” because unions will argue in court that laying off employees would run afoul of the new rights created by SCA 7.
SCA 7 is part of a national effort by government-union leaders in blue states. Illinois’s Amendment 1, passed by the state’s voters in November, broadly prohibits any state or local-government action that “interferes with, negates, or diminishes the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively.” Both laws broaden classes of employees that can be organized, even in violation of federal law. Pennsylvania’s H.B. 950, potentially like SCA 7, would erect a permanent barrier to any change in the employment status of government employees and would expand the power of government unions more generally.
The stakes are high for California. If SCA 7 becomes law, it cements California as the most anti-employer state in the country and will give government employers decreasing power to resist even more unreasonable demands by unions.
