Governor, legislators need to find middle ground in challenge to ACT 10

When you throw a large rock into a small pond, the ripples radiate out in all directions. Depending on the size of the rock and how close to shore it is, the resulting wave could end up making significant changes to the shoreline.

In 2011, Gov. Scott Walker’s administration dropped an island-sized boulder onto state and local government with the introduction and passage of Act 10. The singular goal of the law was to gut public employee unions.

Now, more than a decade after its passage, a coalition of labor groups has filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn Act 10. However, just as with the rock thrown into a pond, it is impossible to pull back all the waves and ripples. It is impossible to make things exactly as they were before, and in some instances what is there now could be preferable.

Taxpayers, public employees, and local elected officials should be watching closely as the new legal challenge moves through the courts. State voters and leaders must watch that the cure sought by public employee unions, doesn’t end up causing more headaches and hardship for taxpayers and residents.

Act 10 pulled the teeth out of most public employee unions, limiting them to negotiating with local schools and governments only on base wages. The measure also stopped the automatic withdrawal of union dues for public employees and required unions to hold annual recertification votes. The law also forced public workers to pay more for health insurance and retirement benefits.

Act 10 exempted the law enforcement and firefighter unions, which coincidently had backed Walker’s gubernatorial campaign. Although at the time, this exemption likely had more to do with basic self-preservation as the legislation drew tens of thousands of protesters surrounding the state capital over a several-week period.

The law was the signature legislation of former Gov. Scott Walker’s administration and heavily influenced the remainder of his term including an unprecedented, and ultimately unsuccessful, recall attempt as well as impacting his attempt to run for president.

The new lawsuit was filed on the grounds that it violates the state constitution’s uniformity clause. In Wisconsin, state and local governments must treat all people the same. The law doesn’t care if people are treated well or poorly, just that the state treats everyone the same.

The recently filed lawsuit has legal merit behind it. The law very clearly grants some public employees rights and privileges that other public employees do not have, solely based on if their job meets the public safety threshold.

The challenge is expected to take a year or more to work its way through the court system, where it is likely to end up in front of what is currently a liberal-leaning supreme court. The groups involved in the lawsuit are banking on that court to ultimately side with them.

There is no doubt that Act 10 resulted in significant changes to local governments and schools. It has been cited as being the cause of an avalanche of early retirements at state agencies, local governments and in schools as anyone who could leave public employment chose to do so. The resulting experience drain has had lasting impacts on public policy. It is also cited as a contributing factor in the employment and retention struggles still challenging public employers at all levels.

The bigger question, and the one that must be answered by judges and ultimately voters, will be if the remedy of potentially undoing Act 10, could end up having more negative consequences than the original law.

Letting the court decide this issue is like using a chainsaw instead of a scalpel. The governor and legislature should attempt to find a compromise that creates a level playing field for all state employees while addressing the excesses of Act 10 yet protecting taxpayers rather than rolling the dice on an all or nothing court decision.

Central Wisconsin Publications Editorial Board consists of publisher Kris O’Leary and Star-News editor Brian Wilson