SEATTLE - An issue coming up again this year in the Washington Legislature is whether to restore the cost-of-living allowance (COLA) to paychecks of teachers and other education workers who have done without it since 2009.

To community college instructors such as Esther "Little Dove" John, a psychology instructor at Seattle Central Community College, the COLA is a matter of fairness. Washington voters decided in 2000 that workers in public education should get cost-of-living adjustments based on inflation, but the legislature put them on hold during the state budget crunch.

Today, John said, the budget crunch is hers. She said she worries about spending even an extra $5.

"Since the COLA has been suspended, it's felt like I've been in one of those rooms where the walls are closing in on you. It's gotten harder and harder for me to make my rent, to afford food, to find the money to pay for my health care," John said.

Teachers' unions have said restoring the COLA also helps the local economy by giving more workers a little more take-home pay to spend. Gov. Inslee's proposal, for a 1.3 percent COLA, is part of a $200 million boost he is advocating for school funding.

A preliminary bill in the House (H 2832) would restore the COLA, which has bipartisan support from more than 50 lawmakers. It's an idea that has not made headway in past sessions, but John said this year could be different, with the governor's backing.

"He said that by closing some unnecessary tax loopholes that big businesses get, we could fund the cost-of-living adjustment for this year," John said. "So, I feel like we have a better chance this time than we've had in a while."

The governor did not specify which tax loopholes might be closed, although one that has been unpopular is the so-called "Big Oil Loophole." Passed in the 1940s, it gives today's oil refinery owners what detractors say is an unintentional $41 million annual state tax break.




get more stories like this via email

Advocates and stakeholders have solutions for the Virginia Employment Commission to get through its backlog of unemployment appeal cases.

According to the commission, during the first year of the pandemic, unemployment claims reached historic levels.

In 2020, more than 1 million claims were filed. Although the number of claims filed has declined since then, appeals are still facing longer processing time.

The agency's issues stem from underfunding, short staffing, and lacking technology, according to a 2021 report from the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission.

Pat Levy-Lavelle, senior intake attorney at the Legal Aid Justice Center, said one way to fix the issue is hiring more staff for first-level appeals. However, pandemic-era decisions are having a ripple effect now.

"Earlier in the pandemic, the former Secretary of Labor for Virginia basically said we had focused on folks to answer the telephones, and we forgot about staffing up in terms of having enough hearing officers," Levy-Lavelle recounted.

He added while work has begun to get more people in, there have been some hiring challenges.

Other recommendations are the commission having notices written so they are easier to understand. But, Levy-Lavelle feels having stakeholders come together to review recommendations to determine their necessity, will be a good first step to improving the agency.

Recently, a bill came to a vote in the House of Delegates to cut down the number of days a person has to file an appeal on unemployment claims. Although the bill failed, some are worried strategies to aid the employment commission are not heading in the right direction.

Flannery O'Rourke, staff attorney at the Virginia Poverty Law Center, described the challenges with implementing policy recommendations.

"Any kind of legislative fix, I think, is more complicated to implement," O'Rourke contended "I think we will still see if the governor's proposed budget amendment to fund current appeals staff will go through, and there's also the governor's proposed budget amendment that will help improve the claimant self-service system."

O'Rourke added stakeholder and legislative action needs to be taken quickly. With the commission still struggling to meet current needs, she hopes things will be resolved in a timely manner, so it can better assist people with appeals.

A Utah lawmaker has proposed a bill which could impose stricter restrictions and regulations for public employees.

Passage of House Bill 241, sponsored by Rep. Jordan Teuscher, R-South Jordan, would mean union stewards and leaders would not be allowed paid time to engage in union work. It would also prohibit a public employer from deducting union dues from a public employee's wages and prohibit public money or public property to be used for union organizing or administration.

Shelley Bilbrey, court clerk for Salt Lake City for almost two decades, has been a member of her union for the last 16 years and has been a union steward the last eight. She said in her opinion, the provisions mean Utah labor unions are in for the fight of their lives.

"A union member cannot do any union business whatsoever in a public building," Bilbrey explained. "That, right there, pretty much puts a kibosh on the union."

Teuscher has said it is an issue of using taxpayer money to process payroll deduction for union dues. Bilbrey countered she is shocked and confused because public employees have other deductions being taken out of their paycheck, and she does not see how union deduction fees are different.

Bilbrey added the measures proposed in the bill would heavily complicate helping union members. Bilbrey explained she joined her union to have a voice. As a union steward, Bilbrey emphasized she has a specific number of hours covered to handle union issues. If the bill were passed, Bilbrey stressed union issues would have to be resolved on one's own time.

"I don't know how to figure out how we would go around that," Bilbrey admitted. "What am I supposed to say to someone? 'Oh yeah, hey, meet me at Denny's.' "

Bilbrey added being part of a union is all about leveling the playing field and about giving individuals a voice at the workplace. She sees the bill not only as perplexing, but as an attack on public employees and Utah unions.

Researchers have said rural communities face a host of unique challenges, and access to paid leave is one of them. Advocates hope the needs of rural families are part of the debate, as discussion ramps up for a statewide program in Minnesota.

Gov. Tim Walz has included a paid family- and medical-leave program in his proposed budget.

Leota Goodney, activist and retired accounting firm operator from Northfield, said creating pathways for such a benefit could be helpful to small businesses in rural areas. She said it is a struggle everywhere, but is more profound in Greater Minnesota, where smaller firms and the self-employed are considered key drivers of local economies.

"There are not large employers like there are in the urban areas, and many of the large employers in the urban areas already offer some kind of paid family leave," Goodney pointed out.

A report by the think tank New America said only 61 % of women in rural communities have paid time off of any kind to care for a new child or an ill loved one.

The Walz plan calls for nearly $670 million to get the program started, with a less than 1% payroll tax to maintain funding. The Minnesota Chamber of Commerce argued it would place too much financial stress on small businesses.

The organization estimates the plan would cost Minnesota businesses $1 billion, but Goodney countered having employers and their staff pitch in is a small sacrifice in establishing a benefit which can help recruit workers for rural areas.

"I definitely think that it makes living more attractive in rural areas," Goodney asserted. "This is a way to keep people from leaving rural areas to go somewhere else where they can actually make a living."

Nearly a dozen states have adopted paid-leave laws. Minnesota's plan would cover up to 12 weeks of medical leave and up to 12 weeks of family leave.

The state has a $17 billion surplus and Democrats feel optimistic about pushing proposals such as paid leave through because of their majorities. It remains unclear what will be in the final spending plans with several priorities announced in recent weeks.