Original publisher: Washington: U.S. G.P.O.: For sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O., 2008. LC Number: KF27 .E3395 2007h OCLC Number: (OCoLC)246694074 Subject: First responders -- Legal status, laws, etc. -- United States. Excerpt: ... 11 sponders can meet and discuss those important safety and home-land security issues, and that process is collective bargaining. Since the 1930s, all private-sector employees have enjoyed the right to collectively bargain. The workers who build our firetrucks and manufacture equipment can collectively bargain, but tens of thousands of men and women who risk their lives every day can-not. There is something wrong with that equation. H.R. 980 provides us a seat at the table, nothing more. The measure is designed to encourage each state to craft its own stat-ute to govern bargaining processes for their public safety employ-ees. Provided that four simple conditions are met, the federal govern-ment adopts a hands-off posture. Those conditions are: one, a mechanism for employees to determine whether or not they wish to be represented; two, a formalized process for management and labor to meet and discuss terms and conditions of employment; three, a non-binding dispute mechanism process; and, four, the ability to enter into legal binding contracts if - and I emphasize if - an agreement is reached. Provided that states substantially comply with those four cave-ats, the federal government has no further role in that state. If, however, a state refuses to enact its own law, the Federal Labor Relations Authority would issue regulations that would, in fact, be-come that state's bargaining law for public safety officers. Recognizing that we are dealing with public funds and local gov-ernment's fiscal authority, jurisdictions are never compelled to reach an agreement. At the end of the day, local government con-trols the purse strings and can simply say no. H.R. 980 mandates a process, not an outcome. This bill presents a rare opportun...