Donald J. MacLaughlin, running for Onondaga County Legislator, 2nd District

 

1. A Project labor agreement is a comprehensive pre-hire collective bargaining agreement that establishes standardized conditions and wages for all contractors and subcontractors on a PLA covered project. PLAs offer:

Stable labor costs so you can bid without guessing.
Reliable supply of local skilled workers for the project duration.
Apprenticeship trained and certified workers.
A no-strike, no lockout commitment.
Binding procedures to settle disputes, so no work stoppages.
Management flexibility to meet special project needs.

Do you support Project Labor Agreements? If not, explain why.

ANSWER: Yes. I would like to know more about PLAs, the pros and cons based on the actual experiences from implemented PLAs. I believe a "PLA covered project" applies to government contracts work for public projects but do other "projects" qualify?

2. Private school vouchers and other schemes like education tax credits for K-12 private school expenses undermine public education by taking scarce public funds away from public schools that are open to the public and shifting them to private schools.
The AFL-CIO strongly supports legislation that would strengthen public education by helping states and local school districts reduce their class sizes and finance school repair, construction, and modernization projects with protection for prevailing community wages. A growing number of public schools all across the country are being forced to set up classrooms in trailers, hallways, and closets in order to accommodate their rapidly rising enrollments. One-third of all public schools also need extensive repair or replacement.

What is your view of proposals to provide for private school vouchers and/or charter schools?

ANSWER: I am opposed to voucher programs and charter schools because they take public funding away from guaranteed and universal public education. My wife, daughter, son-in-law and 2 brothers are educators in the public school system and I know first hand of the difficulties facing our public school system.

What would you do to improve the state of disrepair many of our public schools are currently experiencing?

ANSWER: I would support an increase in progressive State and local taxes, if necessary, to preserve funding for public schools. I would do what I could to ensure that upstate public schools get their "fair share" of state funding and I would provide much needed visible support to elected school board members, school officials and teachers to validate their efforts to provide high quality education to all children.

3. Ninety-four percent of workers say firing an employee for supporting union representation is an “unacceptable action” and 80 percent say they are aware that such actions are against the law. Nevertheless, employers illegally fire union supports in 31 percent of organizing campaigns and many use other tactics to thwart workers’ efforts to form unions.
A recent report by Human Rights Watch shows that existing laws are too lax and unenforced to prevent employer attacks on workers’ rights. For instance, while employers can prevent unions from contacting workers at their work places to discuss the advantages of union membership, they are free to deluge workers with anti-union messages.

Do you believe employers should be held accountable for their anti-union activities?

ANSWER: Absolutely.

If yes, what actions should be taken against companies that violate workers’ rights to organize?

ANSWER: I would call upon management to cease their efforts
against workers rights and I would work to support workers rights by
attending workers rallies and by using public oversight and regulation to
discourage opposition to unions. I also would want to ensure that no
public funds or funding is being used for the purpose of violating workers'
right to organize.

How could labor laws be improved to guarantee workers’ right to organize?

ANSWER: I would need to work with a "labor friendly" law firm or attorney to develop improvements in existing labor laws that would "guarantee workers' rights to organize." I would look into the legality of withholding public funding to agencies, organizations and companies who are violating workers rights to organize.

4. While the economy has been growing, this growth has been accompanied by a sluggish job market that seems to provide too few with a rising standard of living or greater economic security. Economists have attributed this unique predicament to several factors, including corporate downsizing, global competition, the introduction of labor saving technologies, and a pattern of increasingly large rewards to more highly skilled employees. Indeed, a recent study found that most Americans today are worse off than they were before the 1989-1991 recession.
Many northeast communities have lured businesses or encouraged them to stay through tax incentives. However, these incentives have not prevented those companies from downsizing the jobs of those very same taxpayers who offered the tax breaks in the first place.

Should companies be able to accept such tax breaks only to downsize thereafter?

ANSWER: Before a company is eligible to receive an approved tax incentive it could be required to stipulate that it has a multi-year, solid business plan to grow and be profitable. The business plan would be consistent with market expectations and/or internal budgets and forecasts. (Note: "thereafter" is a very long time and marked conditions do change so there can't be a reasonable expectation or guarantee that a company receiving a "tax break" will never need to reduce its workforce)

How would you correct this apparent inequity?

ANSWER: Answered above.

5. An honest day’s work should be rewarded with an honest day’s pay. That’s what a “Living Wage” is all about. Living wage ordinances have been enacted in 80 localities across the nation and have been passed in Rochester, Buffalo and New York City.
A living wage ordinance requires employers to pay wages that are above federal or state minimum wage levels. Only a specific set of workers are covered by living wage ordinances, usually those employed by businesses that have a contract with a city or county government or those who receive economic development subsidies from the locality. The rationale behind the ordinances is that city and county governments should not contract with or subsidize employers who pay poverty-level wages.
The living wage level is usually the wage a full-time worker would need to earn to support a family above the federal poverty line, ranging from 100% to 130% of the poverty measurement. The wage rates specified by living wage ordinances range from a low of $6.25 in Milwaukee to a high of $10.75 in San Jose ( A wage of $8.96 an hour with health benefits is recommended for Syracuse, NY.).
Living wage ordinances provide much needed raises for low-income workers. Wages for the bottom 10% of wage earners fell by 9.3% between 1979 and 1999. The number of jobs where wages were below what a worker would need to support a family of four above the poverty line also grew between 1979 and 1999. In 1999, 26.8% of the workforce earned poverty-level wages, an increase from 23.7% in 1979.

Can you provide a good reason why you would not support legislation that requires a living wage for workers? Please include your position on a living wage for Syracuse-area workers.

ANSWER: I don't believe that governments should contract with or subsidize employers who pay poverty-level wages. I also support an increase in the Minimum Wage. I would support and participate in public hearings on a "living wage ordinance" and could support a living wage ordinance with enforcement provisions for the Syracuse area based on the experiences in the cities mentioned above.

6. “Down-waging” has become a standard practice by highly profitable companies who replace full-time workers with part-timers, temps or sub-contract out for lower wages and poorer benefits. Between 1980 and 1995, 42-million jobs were lost in the United States. Each year, there are 50 percent more people laid off than are victims of crime, which raises the question of which is the greater social ill.
Reduced wages and benefits negatively impacts on families’ ability to afford adequate health care. Forty-three million Americans do not have health insurance and another million lose it each month.

And, while many parents believe college costs will be the biggest expense they face for their children, in fact many will spend more in a year on quality child care than on public college tuition, according to a new Children's Defense Fund (CDF) report.

The AFL-CIO supports guaranteed high-quality child-care, health care, job education and training.

What steps can elected officials take to ensure that these benefits are available to all Americans?

ANSWER: Elected officials supportive of AFL-CIO efforts in this regard should work with the AFL-CIO to understand what has been done and what further can be done to promote legislation supportive of these initiatives. Depending on the breadth of specific initiatives, I believe that incremental implementation steps and a strong national economy will be required to support enactment of these benefits to all Americans.

7. Those who advocate the privatization of government services seek a significant reduction in the government’s role in society. But, market-oriented policies cannot be relied on, by themselves, to meet our citizens needs.
Studies conducted by Cornell University found that the claims by privatization ideologues, are “quite groundless” and the empirical research supporting such claims are “so flawed as to be useless as a policy guide.”
Instead, privatization of government services has been shown to
•diminish the access to public services
•reduce employee morale, productivity and turnover
•exploit part-time workers through low wages and benefits
•increase discrimination against minorities
•cause the loss of government sovereignty
•weakens constitutional rights (e.g., whistle blowing, ethical conduct)
•reduce quality of services
•increase corruption, bribery and kick-backs
•lose accountability for public values and services.

Do you support privatizing public services? Please explain your answer.

ANSWER: I am not in favor of broad-based, blanket privatization policies for public services in order to reduce government's role in society. Any privatization of public services should be done on a case-by-case, specific basis and based on sound, economic, quality considerations, etc. There may be legitimate opportunities for organized labor if certain public services are privatized and there may be some public functions that can be performed better outside of certain local government functions. For example, a small municipality may not have the ability to best handle trash collection and disposition.

8. As an elected official, how would you ensure that the voice of labor and community-based agencies are recognized on decision-making bodies such as the Industrial Development Authority?

ANSWER: As an elected official, I would publicly call for full representation on our community's decision-making bodies. I would contact the decision-making bodies, their board members and administrators and call upon them to appoint labor and community based representatives to their Boards. I would also ensure that the public is fully informed when labor and community-based agencies are not represented on such decision-making bodies.

Return to candidate response page

 

Greater Syracuse Labor Council Questionnaire