By: Mark Glennon*
Illinois voters will be asked in November to approve or reject Amendment 1, a state constitutional amendment that would give every Illinois worker the right to collectively bargain for anything whatsoever affecting their “economic interests.”
Supporters claim passing the amendment would be good for government budgets because it would lead to more tax revenue. Most recently, that claim was made in a Chicago Sun-Times column titled, “Workers Rights Amendment would be good for public budgets.” The column is by the executive director of the union-aligned Illinois Economic Policy Institute and reflects claims made in their study on the matter.
The amendment, says the column, would raise wages because unionized workers earn more and higher wages mean more tax revenue.
Think about how crazy that is while remembering that it’s only government workers that the amendment would apply to, according to its lead sponsor in the Illinois Senate, the Wall Street Journal and others: It’s the government that would have to pay the higher wages, and that cost would dwarf the additional tax collections thereon.
Supporters of the amendment can’t have it both ways. They can’t claim the amendment would push government wages up and at the same time claim government budgets would improve.
That’s not to say workers shouldn’t have the right to bargain collectively and unionize for fair wages (which they already have under current law). Just don’t claim that it helps government budgets.
More importantly, bargaining for wages is not the problem with Amendment 1. Beyond wages, it would give workers a permanent, personal constitutional right to bargain for essentially anything under the sun — a vast expansion of government union powers. Anything affecting their economic interest, would, under the amendment, be subject to organized demands in labor negotiations.
That broad right would make any number of badly needed reforms nearly impossible.
Take consolidation of local governments, for example. In concept, there is bipartisan agreement that Illinois’ absurdly large number of local governmental units — nearly 9,000 — should be reduced to lower costs. But consolidation would mean layoffs, so public unions have never liked the concept. You can therefore be sure that, if the amendment passes, government workers would demand contract assurances barring layoffs resulting from consolidation.
Other needed reforms would face the same fate on matters such as prevailing wage laws, pensions and arbitration rules.
Worse yet, contract demands could go still further, with workers insisting on public policy changes not even connected to the worker or his workplace. Its upporters say the amendment means they could bargain not just for their own economic interests but for those of other Illinoisans.
That’s basically anything. Among the matters on which they might attempt to dictate rules are schools and their curriculum. Parental control would likely suffer a major blow. The radicalism of teachers’ unions is now widely known and they will be sure to use their new constitutional power under the amendment to make broader contract demands.
Despite all that, we are supposed to believe that Amendment 1 would help government budgets? No, government costs will jump.
Let’s go back to the private sector.
It’s generally true the amendment cannot apply to the private sector for federal constitutional reasons, though that’s a matter on which its supporters have made brazenly contradictory claims. There is one private sector matter, however, on which the amendment would have a permissible effect. That’s its prohibition against Illinois ever becoming a right-to-work state.
That means Illinois could never allow private unionized workers to opt out of union membership if the amendment passes. Twenty-eight states are right-to-work states, including all our neighbors except Missouri.
Does that mean Amendment 1 would lead to higher private sector wages and higher tax collections as its supporters claim?
Not at all.
First, for Illinois to become right-to-work, both houses of the General Assembly and the governor would have to agree. That’s not going to happen. Even if Republicans somehow won all three, that wouldn’t be enough because many Illinois Republicans are as beholden to unions as any Democrats. And, if it ever did happen, it would have to be under circumstances extremely different from today — circumstances where the decision should indeed be left to elected officials and not dictated by the constitution.
Moreover, becoming a right-to-work state does not mean a prohibition of collective bargaining for better wages. Right-to-work means only that workers can opt out of union membership if they want. Unions say that diminishes their bargaining power. However, the extent to which that really happens depends heavily on the details. In other words, if it is done properly, right-to-work preserves the power to bargain as a unit for fair wages while still allowing workers to drop out of union membership.
In summary, Amendment 1 would not help government budgets. To the contrary, government costs can be expected to soar along with the taxes needed to pay them.
*Mark Glennon is founder of Wirepoints.
Wirepoints is collecting all arguments and significant opinion pieces on Amendment 1, pro and con, linked here. Among our own earlier articles on the amendment:
- Tier 2 Illinois Pensioners Could Use Amendment 1 To Revolt For A Fair Deal
- Wall Street Journal Calls Out The Whopping Lie Behind The Pending Constitutional Amendment Illinois Is Ignoring
- Amendment 1 has two objectives: To give massive new powers to government unions and to stop Illinois’ private sector from going Right to Work – Sp. Presentation
- Illinois’ biggest fraud on its voters yet is coming in its official description of proposed constitutional amendment
- Are Workers’ Rights Amendment Supporters Lying In Their Ad, Did They Lie To Legislators Or Lie To The Court?
- Scope Of Pending Illinois Constitutional Amendment Goes Far Beyond Appearances. It’s A Monstrous Giveaway To Public Unions
- Illinois lawmakers want to cement union powers into the state constitution
- Want to Fix Illinois Teacher Shortage? End the Tier 2 Pension Rip-Off
Audio and summary 
If this bill passes, say goodbye to local control over all Illinois parks and expect to see open drug and alcohol use, needles, no sanitation and fire hazards, but no ordinary park users.
It appears that this article has attracted the attention of public union down voters who are doing the usual damage they are quite familiar with. Posting pro union BS and hitting the down vote button. Wirepoints must have struck a nerve with truthfully reporting what a disaster Amend 1 is and the spineless union sheep have got themselves into a tizzy. Vote NO on Amendment One.
Union contracts guarantee fair treatment for all, including equal pay for people of color and women. When people can get good jobs with fair pay, this will boost the local economy.
Vote yes on Amendment 1 to help all workers and boost your local economy. Vote yes 4 workers.
I’m with you, just for different reasons. Vote yes because it will speed up the inevitable collapse of Illinois, and it will be entertaining to watch the courts try figuring it all out as more residents flee the state.
There’s no speeding up the collapse of Illinois. Collapse may never happen. Did Detroit collapse? Not really, it’s still there its just that everyone left, and now there’s Detroit and Michigan diaspora all around the midwest. Is Michigan any better off with Detroit being a dump? Of course not. They have an ugly little dictator for governor and she’s probably going to win again. Sure MI voted Trump in 2016 but Trump supposedly lost 2020 after MI went for Biden….after all Trump did for the auto industry and manufacturing industry in that state, they spurned him and voted for Biden,… Read more »
It already is collapsing. It’s just taking too long. I suppose the recession may speed things up though.
Vote yes for amendment 1 if you don’t want Illinois to collapse. Unions support a strong middle class that will only help the economy. Vote yes 4 workers.
This is basically the message of Amendment 1 supporters — just feel good generalities that do not respond to multiple, specific, major problems with it that we have written about.
Amendment 1 is written assuming your average illinoisan is a complete idiot….and unfortunately they are probably right
Correct. How else do you explain the current leaders of Chicago, Cook, and Illinois being elected? They weren’t appointed. The voters approved them.
Please explain how Amendment 1 will “help all workers” who are not illinois public sector employees?
Union members receive benefits and protections in contracts bargained between the union and employer. But as we’ve seen in Illinois and other states, anti-union lawmakers and big corporations (ie, Rauner, Ken Griffin, and the Koch brothers) have tried to undermine or eliminate the right to collectively bargain. If amendment 1 is passed, Illinois can permanently enshrine the fundamental right to collectively bargain in the Illinois constitution. There is a reason that most of the donations to support this amendment come from non public sector unions. They understand the importance of protecting union rights to help the middle class. It’s in… Read more »
Non illinois public sector employees currently have the right to collectively bargain under nlrb? Once again, please explain how Amendment 1 will “help all workers” who are not illinois public sector employees?
If passed on November 8, 2022, which requires 60% or more of voters voting yes, Amendment One adds to the Illinois State Constitution a ban on Right to Work for private sector unions. That Right to Work ban applies just too the private sector, not the public (government sector). Since Illinois is not currently a right to work state, nothing changes at the union worker level in terms of the worker not being able to opt out of joining the union. Meaning, Illinois private sector workers in a union covered job position (a job position covered by a collective bargaining… Read more »
The result of drinking the union kool-aid. So equal pay isn’t already ensured by the unions? Then what have they been doing besides stuffing cash in the pockets of politicians to approve this awful amendment?
Perhaps you might objectively review the pros and cons of the amendment, then ask yourself if the amendment is for the common good, which is the most important reason to amend the Constitution, isn’t it?
Has the union been honest with its members? Doesn’t seem like it.
Most government building and road construction projects at the state and local level, and many government building maintenance projects in Illinois include private sector union labor. That is a lot of money, much of which comes from state and local taxpayers in various taxes and fees. How does that play out in Illinois? What are the methods used by private sector unions to hike government costs? One reason is due to the prevailing wage laws in Illinois. Another reason is Illinois is not a Right to Work state, so workers in job positions covered by a labor union are forced… Read more »
Regarding Right to Work laws. There are 3 categories of employers. Federal government, state and local government, and private sector. Private sector includes public companies (listed on a stock exchange), private companies, partnerships, non-profits, Jorge’s Taco Truck, etc. The Federal, state, and local governments nationwide are Right to Work. In other words all government employers nationwide are right to work, so if public sector employees want nothing to do with the union for any reason or no reason at all, the employee does not have to pay the union a dime (after the proper paperwork is completed which is sometimes… Read more »
I am correcting this comment I made earlier. See Mike’s description. He is right.
Can it get any more freaking confusing.
Can you make a d fact sheet about that.
SHRM. Supreme Court Bans Mandatory Union Fees for Public-Sector Workers. By Lisa Nagele-Piazza, J.D., SHRM-SCP. June 27, 2018. “’Neither an agency fee nor any other payment to the union may be deducted from a nonmember’s wages, nor may any other attempt be made to collect such a payment, unless the employee affirmatively consents to pay,’ Justice Samuel Alito Jr. wrote for the majority.” “’This decision frees public-sector employees from being forced to pay union fees as a condition of working for the government,’ said Kevin Kraham, an attorney with Littler in Washington, D.C.” “The Supreme Court’s ruling makes every state a… Read more »
National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation (NRTWLDF). Can I be required to be a union member or pay dues to a union? (Federal Government Employee). “All employees of the Federal Government, including Postal Service employees, by law are guaranteed the right to refrain from union membership. See 5 U.S.C. § 7102 (federal employees generally); 39 U.S.C. § 1209(c) (postal employees). (U.S.C. stands for “United States Code.”) That means that you cannot be required to remain a member or pay dues or fees to your union, no matter where you work. Employees of the Federal Government by law are also guaranteed the right to refrain from… Read more »
Thank you for that. I have correct my earlier, wrong comment.
My understanding is all government employees (Federal, state, and local) nationwide can opt out of paying even one penny to a labor union. Mark Mix at NRTW and and probably Mailee Smith at Illinois Policy Institute would be able to confirm or amend that statement. I call that Right to Work and more specifically an attempt to put a a ban on right to work for private sector employees in the state constitution, which may or may not be technically correct. I feel it is important for the public to understand exactly what such rights are for public sector and… Read more »
Mike, you are absolutely right and I apologize for the error. I am correcting my earlier comment.
I am confident Wirepoints can make a three column chart to educate its readership.
Federal Government. State and Local Government. Private Sector. Can worker opt of union (yes or no).
It’s really pretty simple…if the State of Illinois supports Amentment 1 and wants you to belive it’s a good for the state then it is not. Name anything the State of Illinois ever did for the majority of its residents that wasn’t expensive, harmful, racist, deceitful, propoganda and only benefited Democrats. It’s a shame if people of Illinois are fooled by this same old bull again.
Oh, oh it’s a shame, “-1” is going to be fooled by this same old bull again. Some people never learn.
IL employs about 4.7 million workers…and 741K are in the public sector. 384K public sector employees are dues-paying union members. All this is to cement unlimited authority over the state’s taxpayers for 8% of the total workforce. Wow! must be a lot more union dollars going into campaign funds than anyone knows. Vote a BIG NO on November 8!
Vote “YES”. (I can’t stand Illinois and want it to destroy itself)
If it does, not much will change from your perspective. You’ll continue contributing some of your Federal taxes for the ongoing, albeit larger, bailout. I hope it fails so we can move on to debate other topics, HJ. Illinois’ politicians are good for plenty more stupidity.
I think potential bailouts for the failing blue states (like Illinois) will make a good debate topic for the GOP come the 2024+ national elections. Each ridiculous decision Illinois makes may be bad internally, but good nationally.
Illinois won’t need a bailout before 2024. Your fantasy just won’t come true.
I can wait. Whether slow or fast, Illinois will deteriorate as red states prosper.
A bailout is a strawman argument – a real one at some point in the future – but right now a strawman. The issue at hand is the quality of life. High taxes, a corrupt politicians, crushing long term debt, and crime all degrade the quality of life. These factors have already led to population loss, and the rate of loss will likely increase. The current system is not in the long term sustainable and Amendment 1 if passed would make things worse.
If the MSM wasn’t so ideologically one sided while concealing the realities of Amendment 1, more people might have a chance to become informed. Their complicit behavior is another form of misinformation which erodes Illinoisans’ confidence in democracy and fair elections.
BTW, who owns the Sun Times? Why, it’s NPR, never considered an objective news source. Believe nothing that appears in that useless rag.
Couldn’t agree more. That was one of the most ridiculous columns I have ever read. If it’s true that government revenues increase becuase government pays its union employees more then government should pay every union government employee $10,000,000 per year (or month, day, whatever). Think how high tax revenue will soar! For that stupid argument to be true the tax rate of the supposed extra union pay would have to be 100%.
The ILEPI’s report states that around 3% of unionized workers are on assistance (Medicaid, food stamps, EITC, etc) as opposed to 6% of non-unionized workers. But what’s the benefit of joining a union if you still need govt assistance? Aren’t union wages supposed to lift you out of poverty? The ILEPI has always argued higher wages translate to more tax revenue collected by the state, as if that’s some sort of revelation. But there is opportunity cost. That extra dollar we pay in taxes to offer that unionized state worker a higher wage would’ve been inserted into the economy is… Read more »
The bottom line is the architects of Amendment 1 kept it so vague intentionally to disguise the fact that it only applies to public sec unions. It’s a giant fake scam. It seems that anyone who bothers to read the news at this point understands this (thanks to IPI, WP and a few others). Unfortunately the vast majority of voters are complete idiots who never read anything. The idiot voter are ILEPI’s audience and are thus peddlers of FAKE NEWS. And this begs the big question–is Frank Manzo/ ILEPI funded directly with taxpayer $ or just buy public sec unions… Read more »