|
Labor Goes on the Offensive on Jobs Bill By Mike Causey Wednesday, June 10, 1998; Page B02=20 Three of labor's heaviest hitters had a closed-door meeting Friday with Vice President Gore over pending legislation that could shift hundreds of thousands of federal jobs to the private sector. The unusual session was designed to present a united front against the proposed Freedom From Government Competition Act, which is on the congressional fast track. Unions hope -- and expect -- that the White House will tell the Democratic leadership that any bill that gives private contractors an edge in securing more federal jobs is unacceptable. Meeting with Gore were union leaders Bobby L. Harnage,American Federation of Government Employees; Gerald McEntee, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; and the AFL-CIO's John Sweeney. The public sector is one of labor's few bright spots. AFGE, the Letter Carriers, the American Postal Workers Union and, especially, AFSCME have picked up members while most unions continue to shrink. Federal unions fear the bill would cut into the jobs of members as well as their pool of potential members. They say it would mandate privatization of thousands of jobs now held by career civil servants. Postal unions are equally worried about Postal Service outsourcing to cut costs. Under the bill -- outlined here April 27 -- agencies could contract out services provided by units of 50 or fewer employees. Critics say that would allow contractors to nibble away at the work force without competitive bids. The bill also would require agencies to list functions and jobs in "competition" with services available in the private sector and to turn over 20 percent of them to private contractors each year for the next five years. That could create lots of vacant parking spaces in many federal agencies. Backers of the legislation believe that letting the private sector handle more federal functions could save the taxpayers lots of money -- both in salary and long-term retirement costs -- because industry could do them more efficiently. The Clinton administration has embraced privatization to a large degree -- but nothing like the proposed legislation. Opponents of the plan -- mostly federal employee unions and management groups -- argue that the bill would stack the deck against in-house federal operations. They say the government already spends $120 billion a year paying private contractors, compared with its annual federal payroll of about $108 billion. The direct appeal puts Gore on the spot. It was designed to let the administration know this isn't just a federal union issue but one of concern to the Democratic Party's most important political ally. The White House has eliminated 300,000 federal jobs and told agencies to get rid of many "overhead" jobs in personnel, payroll and the like. The idea is that the private sector can do much of the work better and at less cost. Gore is the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination. He's been the administration's liaison with federal unions, smoothing ruffled feathers when the White House cut jobs or pushed reengineering -- which made many of the about-to-be-reengineered nervous -- and each of the five times President Clinton proposed lower raises than called for by the bipartisan 1990 federal pay law. He has recommended a 3.1 percent raise for 1999, but Harnage says anything less than 5.8 percent is "unacceptable." Privately, many union leaders prefer Gore to Clinton. Gore knows Washington like few politicians. He grew up here and, as the son of a U.S. senator, knows how the federal establishment works and the importance of a cooperative civil service. Since he has spent most of his adult life in government, he belongs to the same retirement system -- and health program -- as most civil servants. Gore's more sympathetic attitude, and the fact that he still needs labor support, is the reason unions prefer working with -- and on -- him rather than his immediate supervisor. |
|
