The Washington Times
  • Subscribe
  • Times News Services
  • RSS
  • Mobile Headlines
  • e-edition
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • REGISTER
  • LOG IN
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • WELCOME
  • Your Profile
  • Log Out
  • Front Page Image
  • Classifieds
  • Autos
  • Real Estate
  • Jobs
  • Special Sections
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • News
    • World
    • National
    • Politics
    • National Security
    • DC Area
    • Business
    • Entertainment
    • Technology
    • Investigations
    • Faith
    • Energy
    • Environment
    • Headlines
    • Citizen Journalism
  • Opinion
  • Sports
    • NFL
    • NBA/WNBA
    • MLB
    • NHL
    • Tennis
    • Golf
    • Motorsports
    • Soccer
    • NCAA
    • Olympics
    • Outdoors
    • Other
  • Culture
    • Home & Living
    • Family & Kids
    • Fashion
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Washington Visitors
    • Books
    • Military History
    • Life
    • Auto
    • TV Listings
    • Movie Listings
    • Death Notices
    • Entertainment
  • Themes
  • Communities
  • Shopping
    • Stores
    • Coupons
    • Daily Double
    • Promotion
    • How It Works
  • Videos
    • Two Guys
    • Birnbaum on Washington
    • Liz Glover
    • Amanda Carpenter
    • Morning Briefing
    • Documentaries
    • Joe Giganti
    • Video Game Minute
  • Podcasts
    • About Headlines
    • Audio and Radio
    • America's Morning News
  • Politics

    Massive bill steals show in health care debate

  • Commentary

    Al Qaeda's prospects

  • Sports

    Slow start dooms Capitals

  • National

    Winfrey: Prayer influenced 2011 exit

  • Politics

    Report: ACORN mismanaged grant money

  • Politics

    Obama's approval rating falls below 50%

  • Local

    Report: D.C. schools chief Rhee mishandled sexual misconduct scandal

Home » Opinion » Commentary

Monday, June 8, 2009

VITTER/MCCLINTOCK: Capping pay, sapping incentives

Rate this story

Average 0.00
after 0 votes
Login or register to rate this story

  • Font Size -+
  • Print
  • Email
  • Comment
  • Tweet this!
  • Share
  • Article
  • Comments ()
  • Click-2-Listen
  • Videos

More Commentary Stories

  • Money for phantom jobs
  • EPA in a rush on gases
  • Constitutionally, the next time
  • Tibet thrown under the bus

By Sen. David Vitter and Rep. Tom McClintock

COMMENTARY:

Imagine working at a company that treats every employee exactly the same, irrespective of their individual effort. No matter how hard you work or how much your co-workers slack off, you get exactly the same pay. For millions of people, America's outdated labor laws and one-size-fits-all collective-bargaining agreements make this a reality.

Maybe this is why studies show union members are less satisfied with their jobs than are nonunion workers and many Americans simply refuse to work in union shops. Indeed, just 9 percent of nonunion workers tell pollsters they would like to join a union, and private-sector union membership has declined steadily for a generation.

Why is it that a bargaining process designed to improve workers' satisfaction and happiness collectively should produce such dissatisfaction and unhappiness individually?

Perhaps the simple answer rests in that unique human desire to excel in what we do and to be recognized and rewarded for that excellence. True, collective bargaining increases the ability of workers to take a position in negotiating terms of employment, thus raising the median position of all workers in the group. But the situation then leaves them in the unenviable position of abandoning any additional rewards for individual skill and achievement. More important, it ties employers' hands in rewarding exceptional employees in order to encourage that hard work and innovation.

For that reason, we have introduced the Rewarding Achievement and Incentivizing Successful Employees (RAISE) Act to allow hardworking union members to escape the false choice between collective bargaining and individual reward that our outdated labor laws have forced upon them. Without this legislation, union workers end up trapped in a one-size-fits-all contract that denies them the opportunity to be rewarded for individual excellence and achievement. Under current law, it is impossible for the most determined achiever to be rewarded in any material way beyond the most complacent co-worker.

Why shouldn't employers be allowed to add individual rewards to the union-negotiated wage base? Why does the wage floor set through union contracts also have to be a wage ceiling for those union members who go the extra mile to get ahead?

Many owners of unionized businesses would gladly pay individual workers more if they could. Some have tried, but over the years, the National Labor Relations Board repeatedly has struck down individual raises and bonuses.

Any employer will say that the key to a successful business is to reward hard work and attract quality workers. Any worker will say that the key to job satisfaction is knowing that greater effort will produce greater reward. Neither is possible when union negotiators put a pay cap on employees regardless of individual merit or effort.

Under the RAISE Act, union members would retain all the collective-bargaining rights under current law, and employers would be bound to the wage-and-benefit schedules negotiated under those laws. But in addition to the floor established by the union contract, employers could add bonuses for those workers who go the extra mile - combining the benefits of collective bargaining with the rewards of individual achievement.

Years ago, Adm. Grace Hopper observed that in all her years in the U.S. Navy, she had determined that the greatest impediment to human progress was the phrase, "But we've always done it this way." That is the only answer we have heard in opposition to this simple reform, and in an era when change is in the air, that's no answer.

Sen. David Vitter, Louisiana Republican, is a member of the Senate Small Business and Enterpreneurship Committee. Rep. Tom McClintock, California Republican, is a member of the House Education and Labor Committee.

[Get Copyright Permissions] Click here for reprint permissions!
Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC

Post a comment

There are comments on this article, submit your opinion!

Please login or register to post a comment

Ask a Question

You Report

Do you have another point of view, photos, audio, video or more information about a story?

Top Stories

Most Read

  1. Health bill could get 34-hour reading in Senate
  2. Work site arrests of illegals fall dramatically
  3. KELLNER: New Apple mouse really is 'Magic'
  4. Senate health care bill creates new marriage penalty
  5. PRUDEN: Obama bows, the nation cringes
More Top Stories »
  1. Massive bill steals show in health care debate
  2. 19 gang members face racketeering charges
  3. EXCLUSIVE: Taliban chief hides in Pakistan
  4. Report: D.C. schools chief Rhee mishandled sexual misconduct scandal
  5. EXCLUSIVE: Hoffman considering recount claim

Most Shared

  1. Religious leaders vow civil disobedience on anti-life issues
  2. Report: D.C. schools chief Rhee mishandled sexual misconduct scandal
  3. PRUDEN: Obama bows, the nation cringes
  4. Faint Shroud of Turin text proves artifact real, book says
  5. Senate health care bill creates new marriage penalty
More Top Stories »
  1. EDITORIAL: Chicago, Afghan-style
  2. Massive bill steals show in health care debate
  3. Socialist or vast expansion?
  4. Unforeseen climate 'crisis'
  5. EDITORIAL EXCLUSIVE: On terrorists, Justice recused

Most Commented

  1. PRUDEN: The Third World and Obama
  2. Religious leaders vow civil disobedience on anti-life issues
  3. Army lacks guidelines to deal with jihadists in ranks
  4. Senate health care bill creates new marriage penalty
  5. EDITORIAL: Get ready to bomb Iran
More Top Stories »
  1. Dems up pressure on health bill's holdouts
  2. EXCLUSIVE: Taliban chief hides in Pakistan
  3. Work site arrests of illegals fall dramatically
  4. Obama's approval rating falls below 50%
  5. Unforeseen climate 'crisis'

Listen to Washington Times Radio

  • America's Morning News

    with John McCaslin and Melanie Morgan

Question of the day

White House officials and Senate Democrats met in private three times last week to craft health care legislation. Do you think these discussions should be more public?

Blogs & Columns

  • Hot Button Blog

    RNC: Breast cancer recommendations may lead to 'rationing'

  • Belief Blog

    Evangelicals OK civil disobedience

  • Out of Context

    Foods that might kill libido

  • On the Fly

    United lifts some 'award' blocking

  • Technology

    Facebook wins round against phishing spammer

  • Redskins 360

    Rookie Williams hurts ankle

  • SNOBlog

    Beyond 'Woody'

Videos

Advertising Links
TWT Store
  • e-edition
  • Print Edition
  • Weekly Washington Times
TWT Affiliates
  • Middle East Times
  • Golf
  • UPI
  • Arbor Ballroom
  • Washington Times Global
  • About TWT
  • Press Room
  • F.A.Q.
  • Work for TWT
  • Advertise
  • Sponsors
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map

All site contents © Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC.