Candidate Questionnaire

GREATER SYRACUSE LABOR COUNCIL, AFL-CIO

CANDIDATE QUESTIONNAIRE

We reserve the right to publish the results of this questionnaire on our website – www.cnylabor.org

NAME: James Borchik

OFFICE YOU ARE SEEKING: Legislator Dist. 1 Lysander

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.

Yes

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?

History shows that for various reasons charter schools don’t work, and private schools should remain just that. I cannot justify giving public funds to a private system.

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

Long term bonding is a possibility, also it seems that the money derived from the lottery is not being distributed appropriately.

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?

Definitely yes.

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

Fines to start! MAJOR fines. The people who make the decisions should also be punished.

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

Enforcement seems to be the key. Anything the “companies” can do, organizers should be allowed to do also.

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?

How would you correct this apparent inequity?

All money should be returned by companies who pull these scams. Make sure that not only the companies get fined, but also the people who are behind these criminal decisions!

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.

I don’t believe our present living wage is even near a realistic “living”wage! I challenge anyone with or without a family to live on $8.96 per hour. That’s about $260 net for 40 hours.

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?

The money is there but I believe it is being spent on the wrong things. More for job training and universal childcare is a good start.

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.

If there are no controls, for example, whistle blowing, legal regulations etc., the results are self evident.

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?

I will always listen to what labor has to say. The people in labor who know me will vouch for my tenacity when it comes to being pro-labor, and pro-worker.