Act 10 ruling a victory for plain reading of the law

The uniformity clause of the Wisconsin state constitution requires that government treats everyone the same.

The clause specifically addresses uniformity in regard to taxation, as a way to prevent government officials from giving preferential treatment to their political cronies. The spirit of the clause permeates Wisconsin law and sets a standard that all people are treated the same.

Dane County Judge Jacob Frost ruled the 13-year-old law that limits collective bargaining rights for some public employees, but not for others, violates the uniformity clause. His ruling is a win for collective bargaining rights of public employees.

Wisconsin Act 10, passed in 2011, prohibits general public employees from negotiating for anything other than base wage increases with those capped by changes in the consumer price index. The law also put additional rules in place for union certification votes and collection of union dues.

Specifically exempted from those restrictions were most, but not all, public safety positions. These state and local workers have maintained their union protections and collective bargaining rights.

This disparity has been a key flaw in the law since it was passed and politics, rather than a plain reading of the law, was the only reason it has been able to stand to this point.

Act 10 was the signature legislation of Gov. Scott Walker. Walker had been elected in fall 2010 with the charge of righting the state’s financial health.

Thirteen years ago, Wisconsin was in dire straits. Unemployment was at 7.8% statewide. Sales tax revenue and income tax collections were falling at the same time demand for social services and assistance were climbing. Major employers were implanting wage cuts and layoffs to try to weather a national recession.

Walker targeted public employee unions as being a roadblock to the deep cuts he felt were needed to get the state back on track. The legislation was wildly unpopular and tens of thousands of state, local and public school workers descended on Madison for protests and rallies.

The fact that public safety employees were exempted had mostly to do with the real fear that without the backing of police and firefighters, there would be no one there to protect lawmakers and the governor from the crowds of angry protestors.

The unpopular truth of ACT 10 was that a rebalance was needed. Public employee union contracts had limited the ability of lawmakers and officials at the county, school district and municipal levels to make any sort of substantive changes. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos is correct in stating that the law has saved taxpayers billions of dollars over the past 13 years.

As often happens, the pendulum swung too far one way and needed to come back toward center. When passed, Act 10 pushed the proverbial pendulum far to the right. The fact that a judge has ruled to overturn it now is a demonstration that the pendulum has swung back toward center.

The judge’s ruling is far from the final word on the matter. It is expected to end up at the State Supreme Court. It will likely be a major point of contention in next April’s Supreme Court race to decide between a liberal and conservative majority on the court.

The challenge will be to determine how municipalities, counties and school districts move forward. For many rank and file employees, the current system is all they have ever known. Many of the most ardent opponents of Act 10 have retired or otherwise left public employment.

If there is a return to the bargaining tables, it must be from a position of a clean slate based on current realworld conditions rather than dredging up the past.