Legislature(2009 - 2010)BARNES 124
04/13/2009 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB144 | |
| HB207 | |
| HB37 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 144 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 207 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| = | HB 37 | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 37- RIGHT TO WORK 4:23:51 PM CHAIR OLSON announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 37, "An Act relating to the relationship between employees and labor organizations; prohibiting collective bargaining contracts that require employees to join a labor or employee organization; extending the policy and limitations set out in this Act to public employers and public employees subject to the Public Employment Relations Act; and providing for an effective date." 4:23:54 PM CHAIR OLSON stated that the committee would take public testimony. He noted that many people who wanted to testify did not get an opportunity to do so at the last hearing. 4:24:15 PM ZINN DECKER stated that he is a 40-year Alaska resident and a union electrician. He expressed concern with HB 37, since it affects his union's ability to negotiate a living wage, provide adequate retirement to allow his family to remain in Alaska, and also provide sufficient medical coverage. He offered that nonunion employees have 401(k) plans, but that is not nearly enough for retirement. He opined that HB 37 would lower wages, medical and retirement benefits for union and nonunion employees. The bill does not allow people to keep up with inflation costs and the higher cost of living in Alaska. Enacting HB 37 into law would be a bad decision as states that have Right to Work laws do not admit to lower wages, medical benefits, or insufficient retirement plans. 4:26:20 PM JOHN BROWN stated he is a retired operating engineer. He opined that HB 37 does not have anything to do with the Right to Work and this legislation has been around for many years. He stated that the bill would allow people to obtain something for nothing, which is wrong. He opined the fact is that no matter what industry, a person working under a union contract will make 30 to 35 percent more in wages and benefits. He stressed there is a value to a union contract. However, it costs funds to put a union plan into place. This bill would allow individuals to decide to take the benefits but not pay anything for it. He opined that the unions ask employees to pay a fair share. He stated that no one has to join, but they must pay fees which generally range from two and four percent. He also stated that the unions are good for everyone, including communities since wages create a ripple effect through the economy. He urged members to not support HB 37. MIKE LITTLEFIELD, Business Agent, Teamsters Local 959, stated that he is a member of Teamsters Local 959. He offered that the Teamsters Local 959 is opposed to HB 37. He cited statistics from the U.S. Department of Labor and extrapolated that HB 37 would reduce wages for working families by nearly $5,500 per year, increase poverty rates by over 12.5 percent, increase those without health insurance by 21 percent, and increase infant mortality by 16 percent. Lastly, nonunion workers have a 51 percent higher death and injury rate on the job. He opined that this bill is a direct attack on unions and working Alaskans. He said, "I just don't think this legislation needs to be passed." 4:30:00 PM TIM SHARP, Business Manager, Alaska District Council of Laborers, Local 942, stated that on behalf of 5,000 working Alaska, he wished to speak in opposition to HB 37. He expressed concern that with issues Alaska is facing such as the gasline, energy concerns, and a huge recession, that someone would choose to fight with organized labor in Alaska. "Right to Work for less" laws speak for themselves, as do the organized labor laws, which drive up better wages, benefits, and working conditions. "It seems that some of our legislators have decided the real problem in Alaska is that working people in this state are making too much money so they want to bring the average wage down for all Alaskan workers - union and nonunion." The "Right to Work for less" law is designed by business to legislatively kill or neuter unions, the only remaining viable voice for the American worker. When this has happened in other states, wages dropped or staggered and benefits atrophied. "Why would anyone want this for Alaskans," he asked. Nationwide, unions represent only 12 to 14 percent of the American workforce, but in Alaska unions represent 20 to 25 percent of the workforce. The average wages and benefits show the results of the demographics. As recently as three weeks ago a national poll in Parade magazine showed that 90 percent of Americans still support the need for labor unions; they don't support the need for weakened unions. "It's curious to me that some of the very same people that oppose minimum wage increases, improved safety and health standards, prevailing wage standards, and project labor agreements are connected with sponsoring this bill," he said. Some people look for fights and problems to cover up and take the people's focus away from the truly important issues for Alaska. There's an old Irish saying that goes, "May the devil take the toes of all our foes that we would know them by their limping. As far as our labor organization goes anyone that votes to support the "Right to Work for less" law for Alaskans will be seen as limping," he said. The union record speaks for itself. "Please vote against HB 37. It's bad for unions, bad for workers, and bad for Alaska," he said. 4:33:02 PM RANDY GRIFFIN opined that he is in favor of HB 37 since he is also pro-freedom. He stated that the United States is supposed to be a place of freedom, and Alaska is supposed to be the land of the free. He opined that freedom means that one individual can make a deal with another without guns pointed at our heads or any coercion directed from our federal government. Additionally, he stated that he supports the right of private property. He offered his belief that people have lost many freedoms in this country, but still retains the ability to testify. He offered that he has worked as a union member in the 1970s, and was also a laborer during construction of the Trans- Alaska Pipeline System. He further stated that he is currently a nonunion worker in building maintenance. He opined that the 1935 National Labor Relations Act is wrong or at least aspects of it are wrong. He related that the first labor act, the National Industrial Recovery Act was struck down as unconstitutional. He said: Now, union people are good. And everybody wants good working conditions. And so do I, and high wages. But, it's whether we stick a gun at someone's head to get them. That's what's wrong. The unions, if they get out of hand they can destroy the steel industry, the auto industry, and a lot of people think that the unions raise wages. They certainly do but they don't raise the total productivity of the nation. Therefore, they don't raise the whole lot of the votes. I see I've gone over the time and I don't want to be unfair. MR. GRIFFIN urged the committee to vote yes on HB 37. 4:35:29 PM MARK DRYGAS, Battalion Chief, Alaska Professional Fire Association (APFA) stated that the nearly 500 APFA members respond to 75 percent of all 911 calls in Alaska. He stated that he is opposed to HB 37. He recalled earlier testimony by the bill's sponsor, and advised that there is not any prohibition for any of its members to volunteer for any volunteer fire department. He related his understanding that in the past 20 years no one has been disciplined for doing so. He highlighted that this practice happens in Fairbanks and in many locations in the state. 4:36:47 PM TIM EVANS stated that he is very opposed to HB 37. He offered some reasons for his opposition including that all union and nonunion wages and benefits would be reduced, and his belief that 21 percent of Right to Work states lack health insurance. He related that safety and health standards are reduced in non free bargaining unit states. He opined that deaths are 51 percent higher in Right to Work states. He asked why someone should enjoy the benefits of a bargaining unit and not pay their fair share since unions provide the same representation for nonunion employees. He further opined that unions offer better wages, benefits, and representation. The majority of employees would be harmed if some employees do not pay for representation. It is not workers who benefit from Right to Work legislation, but the greed of corporation and large contractors. He asked committee members to please vote no on HB 37. 4:38:41 PM CHRIS GARCIA stated that he is opposed to HB 37. He said he has worked in Right to Work states. "Calling Right to Work right to work would be like putting a euthanasia bill or a pro-abortion bill in the legislature and calling it right to life," he said. He also urged members to oppose HB 37. In response to Chair Olson, Mr. Garcia remarked that he is also in favor of HB 207, the Maximum Benefit from Fishermen's Fund bill. 4:39:48 PM ALLEN BUTE stated that he is totally against HB 37. He said he just returned from Arizona and where people are looking for work at $4 and $5 an hour. If this bill passes it will bring people into the state from India and China, he said. The only reason he can live here is because he receives a decent retirement. If members are serious about labor issues, local hire is an issue the legislature should address. He said that when people come up from Salt Lake City, they go right to the North Slope. The only way control this is through the project labor agreements. In response to Representative Buch, he stated that he is retired. "Don't pass this bill, whatever you do," he said. 4:42:39 PM BRANDON NICHOLS stated he is a member of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW). He said that he is strongly opposed to HB 37. Unions have been a great asset to our workers since they provide improved safety, good wages, and medical benefits. Union friendly states have higher wages and more medical coverage and union companies are much more prosperous, he stated. He offered that he cannot think of a single country opposed to unions that the U.S. should try to emulate. He urged members not to support HB 37. 4:43:46 PM RICHARD HENDREN stated that he is an Alaskan citizen. He offered his belief that HB 37 restores liberty to Alaska's citizens. He suggested that members swore an oath of office to uphold the constitution and today members have an opportunity to do so. He opined that Alaska's constitution is dedicated to the principles that all persons have a natural right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and the enjoyment of the rewards of their own industry. Elected officials are entrusted to uphold these rights. The restrictions imposed in law must be necessary to protect citizens' rights and must not violate people's rights. He stated that the [federal law] as written requires employees to make payments to private organizations they may or may not support, even if it against their religious beliefs. He said he is also opposed to union dues. This federal law is patently unjust. Unions paint bleak pictures of Right to Work states, he said. He urged members to respect their oaths and support the rights of citizens. 4:46:55 PM REPRESENTATIVE BUCH asked since he is "standing up for himself," if anyone else stands up for him. MR. HENDREN stated that Representative Buch does as a legislator. REPRESENTATIVE BUCH explained that he previously has worked as a union organizer. In that capacity, his job was to represent the unrepresented workers and he provided that service for unrepresented workers in his region. He stood up for all workers, including workers like Mr. Hendren, he said. 4:48:13 PM VINCE BELTRAMI, President, Alaska American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), mentioned that at the last hearing over 30 people were at the Anchorage Legislative Information Office (LIO) to testify but were unable to do so. He expressed concern that testifiers were limited to testimony time, yet representatives from the national Right to Work committee were allowed more time to testify. CHAIR OLSON offered that a former commissioner testified for an even longer time. Additionally, he noted that some people are not testifying as public members, but are testifying at the request of the sponsor. MR. BELTRAMI quoted statistics such that in Right to Work states women receive 25 percent less in wages, African Americans earn 22.5 percent less, and Hispanic workers earn 37 percent less in wages. Additionally, the disparity between union and nonunion workers is over 30 percent. He opined that this bill would have a negative impact on women and people of color. He related that no one is forced to join unions as that right is guaranteed by law and has been settled by the U.S. Supreme Court. He referred to some cases such as the U.S. Supreme Court case, 373 U.S. 734, National Labor Relations Board v. General Motors Corporation, or Communications Workers v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988). Thus, he opined that the right to not join a union is a moot point. MR. BELTRAMI opined that the National Right to Work Committee (NRTWC) committee promotes these bills around the country and are funded by big corporate businesses. He further opined that one of their main spokesperson has been billionaire Steve Forbes. He offered his belief that the stance of acting as though the organization cares about workers seems disingenuous to him. He said: Right to Work laws have nothing to do with constitutional freedoms or personal liberties as the gentlemen just mentioned. This legislation is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to allow free riders to get all the benefits without paying their fair share. And as Representative Coghill questioned accurately and assessed workers who opt not to pay dues. They basically get the full benefit of increases to wages and other fringe benefits without investing in any of the costs associated with that representation whatsoever. And that is flat out un- American. Just to summarize: It's already legal for people to refuse to join a union if they choose and refuse to pay the portion of dues that might go towards the union's political activity. Right to Work laws hurts union workers as well as nonunion workers. They hurt women and minorities more severely than others. And it would hurt Alaska businesses. And all the credible data show negative economic impacts when Right to Work law is passed. Alaska deserves better and I encourage you not to pass this bill out of committee. Thank you. 4:52:26 PM CHAIR OLSON emphasized that it is not his intention to move this bill until everyone has weighed in on this issue. MR. BELTRAMI suggested there were many people who still wish to testify on this bill. 4:53:06 PM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN stated he has never been a union worker. He asked if Mr. Beltrami was calling him un-American. MR. BELTRAMI answered no. He offered his belief that it would be un-American to pass a law like this. 4:54:03 PM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN related information from the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW). He stated that the retirement benefit actuarial rate has been reduced to zero percent this year. That means the plan does not provide any additional benefits after March 9. He discussed the actuarial rates. He stated that the actuarial rate relates to the stock market. He offered that the point he wants to make is that no one wants to see a reduction, but the state moved from Tier I to Tier IV for the same reason. He highlighted that everyone is hurt during a bad economy and everyone is forced to make tough decisions on benefit rates and retirement amounts. MR. BELTRAMI said that it is not uncommon for pension funds to have to adjust their actuarial assumptions depending on what is happening in the market. He agreed that in good years they have increased benefits. The reason the economy has declined is due to poor investments made with the American taxpayers' pension funds. Wall Street investors made bad decisions. Now everyone must bear the brunt of those decisions. He opined workers did not have enough voice in the matter. He further opined that passing HB 37 would exacerbate the problem. Defined benefit plans have suffered, but have done significantly better than defined contribution plans. He stated that nonunion members are generally in a defined contribution plan. REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN offered his belief with respect to pension funds that there are no guarantees for union or nonunion workers. 4:57:41 PM MIKE NOTAR, President, Juneau and Vicinity Construction Trades Council, Inc., highlighted his view that HB 37 is a proposed abomination on the state and its working people. He opined that the bill was not filed on behalf of working families. He further opined that HB 37 would make Alaska a Right to Work state, which is an appalling misnomer since workers have an inherent Right to Work. He read from prepared notes: It should simply be called work for less. This is just union busting disguised with a nice sounding label. These laws weaken unions' abilities to collectively bargain by prohibiting union security provisions in collective bargaining agreements both approved by the majority of employees and the employer. These provisions provide that all that benefit from a collective bargaining agreement should pay their fair share of the costs of that union representation. In the U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1977, Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, the court said, "A union shop arrangement has been thought to distribute fairly the cost of these representative activities among those who benefit and it counteracts the incentive that employees might otherwise have to become free riders. To refuse to contribute to the union while obtaining benefits from union representation that necessarily accrue to all employees." Worst of all these laws translate into lower wages and benefits, a diminished standard of living, and substandard legal protections for workers in those states with these laws. Let's remember, when wages fall, so do dollars circulating in Alaska's economy, certainly not something we presently need given the state of our national and state economies. Alaska doesn't want or need this regressive sort of legislation. HB 37 is a dreadful public policy and is not being asked for by working Alaskans. I urge you all to vote against passing it out of committee. 5:00:00 PM TOM CASHEN stated that he is a retired member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) and a former commissioner of the Alaska Department of Labor & Workforce Development (DLWD). He related that he spent a lifetime in labor movement in Alaska. He informed members that one of the electrical industry training centers in Anchorage is named "Tom Cashen Electrical Training Center". He said he'd like to add his name to the list of people who oppose HB 37. 5:01:04 PM REPRESENTATIVE BUCH thanked Mr. Cashen for his former service and his endeavor on behalf of workers across the state. 5:01:41 PM The committee took an at-ease from 5:01 p.m. to 5:02 p.m. 5:02:28 PM ED FLANAGAN stated that he also is a former Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Labor & Workforce Development (DLWD). He joined his colleagues in opposing HB 37. He recalled that he was the DOL commissioner in 2000 when the first Right to Work bill was introduced. He characterized it as a sad day when the bill had a hearing before the House State Affairs Standing Committee. He also recalled that the issue came up during Alaska's Constitutional Convention. He offered his belief that Representative Coghill would have been one of 40 who voted to oppose the issue at that time. He offered his belief that members decided that Right to Work legislation is the last thing Alaska needed. He further opined that the Republican legislators "ran the punk out of the room." He also recalled eloquent testimony given today to provide reasons to support union workers. He asked Chair Olson to "get everybody heard on this, Mr. Chairman." 5:04:39 PM CHAIR OLSON reassured Mr. Flanagan that the committee would not be taking action on HB 37 until everyone who wants to have an opportunity to can weigh in on the bill. 5:05:07 PM RICK CANOY, Business Representative, Teamsters Local 959, stated that he came to Alaska from a Right to Work state and some of his family members have endured hardships due to misguided laws such as the Right to Work bills. He recalled testimony on how unions and non-unions are impacted by Right to Work bills including reduction in wages and benefits. He mentioned this issue compounds the difficulties for unions to negotiate strong agreements. Alaska faces uncertain economics, and he cannot think of a worse time to consider such an ill conceived notion as HB 37, he said. Union workers in Alaska have provided stellar labor and services for Alaskans. He also said he thinks that this is quite a troublesome payback to attempt to derail the faithful workers that are represented by organized labor organizations in this state. He implored members to not pass this bill out of committee. "Kill this, and maybe do this as a show of gratitude. And thanks to those who preceded us and those who are going to work with us side by side now and will follow us in the future. Give us the opportunity to get the best for our people that they may give the best back to the state," he said. 5:07:28 PM RICK TRANI, Executive Director, Teamsters Local 959, urged members to vote in opposition to HB 37. He speculated that this bill would subvert the collective bargaining process. He opined that workplaces offering union wages have better health care, wages, benefits, and work rules. He argued that unions have a more productive workforce and are held to that standard. Thus, unions ask for better wages and conditions. He opined that unions have negotiated better terms of employment contract after contract and these gains are solidified and passed on to generations of successive employees. The collective bargaining process which secures benefits and wages is dependent upon employees to participate as a whole, and added that to allow other employees to secure these gains without participating in the process defeats the inherent purpose of having a bargaining unit. He expressed concern that this HB 37 is even before the legislature. He offered his belief in the National Labor Relations Act and the Public Employee Relations Act. The federal acts do not currently need amendments or changes. He urged the legislature to not needlessly amend the laws. He stated that HB 37 would make the existing bargaining units less secure in their position, weaken safe work place rules, lower wages and benefits, and tilt the balance of the employer/employee relationship unfavorably with respect to the employee. He urged Chair Olson not to limit public testimony on HB 37 to only two minutes as the public's testimony should be heard in full. He urged members to vote no on HB 37. 5:09:23 PM JED WHITTAKER speculated that about 40 people are currently present who will probably not have chance to testify today. He opined that the Right to Work law is a red herring that poses as freedom for the individual but in reality is designed to weaken unions, collective bargaining, and keep wages low. He offered his belief that Right to Work states have a lower per capita income and a higher rate of poverty. He further opined that unions brought America the middle class through the minimum wage, the 40 hour work week, overtime pay, health care benefits, pension plans, and worker safety. He noted that a healthy economy is one in which people have money in their pockets. He stated that Henry Ford understood this and initially Mr. Ford paid his employees $5 per hour, which was an unheard of wage. He stated that Mr. Ford was asked why and he said, "Who will buy my cars?" He asserted that Republicans in the Congress blame the unions for the problems. However, he recalled an article in a recent Wall Street Journal which indicates the money General Motors and Ford has invested in their companies could have bought Toyota, Honda, and Nissan outright. He offered his belief that poor management and poor asset allocation has happened, but instead of blaming management, some legislators blame the unions. He said, "I don't understand why Republicans hate unions. I'm here to tell you unions don't hate Republicans. My union, the Laborers Local 341 endorsed Senator [Ted] Stevens and Representative Don Young." He urged members to defeat HB 37. 5:11:24 PM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN clarified that he does not hold anything against unions. He assured members he would look at HB 37 with an open mind. He reiterated that he is not anti-union. 5:11:43 PM LARRY BENSON, President, American Postal Workers Union, stated that the U.S. is in a profound crisis. He opined that HB 37 lends to a further weakening of the economy by providing lower wages, jobs without benefits, and an inability for workers to sustain a middle class living standard. He said: For thirty years America's economic elites and political allies such as the national Right to Work Group have pursued polices designed to produce this low-wage level economy just as HB 37 does. At the same time, policy makers have sought with some success to maintain high levels of consumer spending. Now, the creation of this low-wage high-spending economy has systematically destroyed the various wages that we individually and collectively save and invest. Instead of an income driven economy, we have become an economy driven by asset bubbles fueled with cheap debt. And the ultimate un-sustainability of this strategy has brought us to our current crisis. The assault on good jobs has proceeded on two fronts, in the purely domestic realm starting with the effective abolition of the right to form unions in the private sector; both the formal and informal structures that encourage the growth of worker bargaining power have been dismantled. HB 37 will further bring about this dismantling. This bill does nothing to improve an economy driven by wages but instead drives further into the abyss an economy driven by asset bubbles fueled with cheap debt again, and will reduce Alaska's wages and jeopardize employer provided health care. You know, "North to the Future" is Alaska's motto. HB 37 does not reflect our true Alaskan spirit. It would be an insult to pass a bill like this. The American Postal Workers Union is opposed to this bill for the reasons I've stated and I urge you to oppose this so called Right to Work bill. 5:13:59 PM TIM MORGAN, Business Representative, Teamsters Local 959, stated that the groups he represents voted for union representation by a majority vote, similar to how legislators are elected by a majority vote. He opined that the Right to Work bill would be like saying if a person did not vote in support of the union, that the person does not need to pay their dues to support their wages. He asked members to vote against HB 37. He offered his belief that his children and grandchildren would not be able to make a decent living in a Right to Work state. 5:15:20 PM DENNIS KNEBLE stated that he is a member of the IBEW. He related a scenario as a comparison between a small town and a union such that when candidate wins by a majority, the taxes are paid by all residents, regardless of whether taxes are increased or decreased. He compared this to how a union works, such that when its members vote to pass a contract, everyone is represented regardless of their position. He asked members to oppose the Right to Work bill. 5:16:29 PM SCOTT SAMMONS stated that he is a member of the Laborers Local 341. He related that he moved to Alaska six years ago from his home state of Arkansas to seek a better living than he could provide for his family when living in Arkansas. He offered his belief that Arkansas, which is a Right to Work state, sets the prevailing wage on a Davis-Bacon job for a licensed electrician at $13.85. If he earned $2 over the $6.25 minimum wage in Arkansas, he would be considered doing very well. He indicated that he researched Right to Work states and found that most states adopted Right to Work laws 50 years ago when Alaska decided not to do so. Alaska avoided Right to Work which has served the state well, and Alaska has prospered. Alaska's unions provide workers with excellent training, health, and retirement benefits, which also provide employers the benefits of a highly skilled work force. Furthermore, employers need a well-trained work force since most people do not work in one job from high school or college graduation until retirement. He mentioned that union jobs offer easy transferability of earned benefits to multiple companies. He emphasized the need for a strong resident work force. He opined that strong unions create a level playing field by setting the standards of employee compensation for union and nonunion companies alike. He said, "Without a strong voice to demand fair treatment and compensation for workers, Alaska could easily sink to the standard of living enjoyed in Arkansas, Mississippi, South Carolina, etc. etc. Thank you very much." 5:19:03 PM RON MCPHETERS, President, Laborers Local 341, explained that he represents over 2,200 members in Southcentral Alaska. He opined that the Right to Work bill would hurt the state's economy, degrade workers' rights, inflate health care costs, and endanger employees. The real issue for him is that the legislature would even consider this bill, since it is such a radical bill, he said. He offered his belief that the legislature has a responsibility to train more Alaskans. He asked, "Why would this committee want to take out the organizations that will assure true Alaskan hire? This is not only true for the laborers, but is true for all unions in the state." He offered his belief that "Right to Work for less" laws deliberately intend to financially cripple unions. Without dues that unions will not have any source of income, which would lead to an unrepresented work force that would earn less, spend less, and hurt Alaska's economy. Without a union, workers are less likely to have health care insurance and the top-notch training earned through apprenticeship programs. "Without these added benefits, who do you think will be having to pay for these uninsured visits to the hospital," he asked. He urged members to vote no on HB 37. 5:20:51 PM CHAIR OLSON offered that the legislature considers about 500 bills each session and he disagrees with about half of them. He related that the committee spends time hearing many bills that many members do not support. One of the side effects of a 90- day session is that it limits the amount public testimony. He apologized to the public for the shortened public testimony time. He stated that everyone who wishes to speak on HB 37 will have an opportunity to provide testimony. 5:22:05 PM SERGIO ACUNA stated that he is a union laborer and spoke in opposition to HB 37. He recalled that 22 states have the Right to Work provision. He said, "Alaska does not need to become the 23rd. I have personally has struggled with the consequences of Right to Work law in other states such as Texas and Nevada." He opined that Right to Work states have lower wages, disrespectful conditions, discrimination, and unsafe working conditions. He offered that his work is important and he takes pride in his work. He stated that he needs to be able to earn enough to provide for more than just "beans and tortillas." Alaskans need decent wages, fair and safe working conditions. He concluded by stating "Alaska does not need Right to Work for less law," he said. 5:23:33 PM CHAIR OLSON announced that HB 37 would be held over for further consideration. 5:23:47 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 01_HB207_version_A.pdf |
HL&C 4/13/2009 3:15:00 PM |
HB 207 |
| 02_HB207_Sponsor_Statement.pdf |
HL&C 4/13/2009 3:15:00 PM |
HB 207 |
| 03_HB207_Fiscal_Note-1-1-041009-DFG-N.pdf |
HL&C 4/13/2009 3:15:00 PM |
HB 207 |
| 04_HB207_Fiscal_Note-2-1-041009-LWF-Y.pdf |
HL&C 4/13/2009 3:15:00 PM |
HB 207 |