Governor Andrew Cuomo and legislative leaders have reached a deal allowing striking workers to collect unemployment insurance benefits after three weeks, a big gift to private-sector labor unions that would further discourage companies from hiring and investing here.

Most state unemployment insurance (UI) systems–including those in many labor-friendly states such as California and Illinois—don’t let strikers collect unemployment, on the basis that their loss of work is, at least initially, voluntary. New York’s policy, on the other hand, has been to let strikers get benefits in those rare cases when work stoppages have lasted more than eight weeks (at which point both labor and management may share responsibility).

Last spring, the Legislature passed a bill (S4573/A6592), sponsored by Senator Tim Kennedy (D-Buffalo) and Assemblyman Sean Ryan (D-Buffalo) that would have allowed strikers to collect UI after just a week of voluntary unemployment—treating them the same as workers who involuntarily become jobless. But that bill apparently was too extreme even for Cuomo, who left it unsigned.

A just-filed compromise measure (S7310), also known as a chapter amendment, has emerged from three-way negotiations between the governor and the Legislature. It’s an indication Cuomo will sign the original Kennedy-Ryan bill some time before the February 7 deadline and that Cuomo will immediately modify it by signing the chapter amendment, which will have been passed by the Legislature. This process, which is often used to fix errors or make specific or technical changes, spares Cuomo from having to veto the more generous original.

The new version would let New York strikers get UI benefits after three weeks—the standard one-week delay plus an additional two-week waiting period. New York thus would grant UI benefits to strikers up to nine days sooner than New Jersey, which in 2018 became the only other state giving UI benefits to strikers (after 30 days). In other union famously labor-friendly states —including California, Illinois, Washington, Ohio, Hawaii and Pennsylvania—strikers are not eligible for any UI benefits.

Granting UI benefits after three weeks will reduce the perceived financial risk of striking, and increase the danger of work stoppages. Besides driving up UI premiums, the policy risks discouraging businesses from investing in labor-intensive (or strike-prone) facilities, such as manufacturing plants represented by the United Autoworkers. The UAW last year struck for 40 days—and UAW’s hundreds of strikers in New York would have collected benefits for almost half those days under this bill.

The UAW, to be sure, had to pay strike benefits from its own coffers to idled members. But as explained in this Wall Street Journal op-ed last year:

New York is already increasing unemployment benefits, scrapping its $450-a-week cap in favor of a formula set to rise each year until 2026, when recipients will get up to 50% of the state’s average weekly wage, which is currently about $1,401.

All this would save unions a big chunk of money. Many unions provide members with strike benefits to make up for lost wages, and the costs can be high. During 2016, which saw the union mount a six-week strike against Verizon, the Communications Workers of America paid members $28 million from its $400 million dedicated strike fund. U.S. labor unions have paid out more than $149 million in strike benefits in just the past three years, federal records show.

Letting strikers collect unemployment benefits would relieve unions of much of those costs, freeing money up for other purposes—such as campaign contributions.

Rolling the dice

The move, apparently pushed by Western New York labor unions, is likely to face federal litigation by employers, whose premiums fund the UI system.

Private-sector labor matters are generally the province of the federal government, and the U.S. Supreme Court in 1979 turned back a challenge to New York’s practice by the New York Telephone Company. But Justice Lewis Powell was joined by two other members of the court in his dissent, warning:

The Court’s decision substantially alters, in the State of New York, the balance of advantage between management and labor prescribed by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). It sustains a New York law that requires the employer, after a specified time, to pay striking employees as much as 50% of their normal wages. In so holding, the Court substantially rewrites the principles of preemption that have been developed to protect the free collective bargaining which is the essence of federal labor law.

Governor Cuomo in 2018 accused the Court of mounting “a direct attack on organized labor” in its decision in Janus v. AFSCME. It’s curious that the governor would believe such a potentially disruptive gift to labor as this bill will fare well with those same jurists.

About the Author

Ken Girardin

Ken Girardin is the Empire Center’s Director of Strategic Initiatives.

Read more by Ken Girardin

You may also like

In Pandemic Recovery, New York’s Tax Base Is More Fragile Than Ever

New York's exceptionally wealthy state tax base is also exceptionally fragile, due to its heavy dependence on the highly volatile (and portable) investment-driven incomes of Wall Street workers and fund managers. Read More

New York’s Private Jobs Rebound Still Trails Most of U.S.

In the seventh month of the coronavirus pandemic, private-sector employment in New York was still recovering more slowly than in other states from the after-effects of the broad spring shutdowns of normal business and social life, according to federal Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Read More

Mixed September for NY: Job Recovery Sluggish, Tax Receipts Up

Continuing a trend from mid-summer, New York's private jobs recovery slowed a little more in September—but state tax receipts came in a bit stronger than expected, according to two monthly reports released by the state late today. Read More

De Blasio’s (Apparent) Good Move Dissolves Into Phony “Savings”

Late Thursday, as hailed in this space, Mayor de Blasio finally made a decisive move—or at least seemed to make a move—in the direction of actually saving some money on labor costs by getting tough with a powerful (and powerfully self-entitled) municipal union. Read More

‘Clusters’ Drive a Widespread Surge in New York’s Coronavirus Infection Rates

New York's coronavirus infection rates have surged to their highest levels since May, pushing 10 counties – including Brooklyn, Rockland and Orange – above a threshold that the Cuomo administration uses to justify travel restrictions on other states. Read More

Not a Moment Too Soon, Bill de Blasio Is Setting a Good Fiscal Example

After months of flailing, floundering and stalling on desperately needed cuts to New York City's pandemic-ravaged budget, Mayor de Blasio just made a smart and appropriate move to save money—in the process defying one of New York's most powerful government employee unions. Read More

Cahill Charges Are An Indictment Of Cuomo’s Policies

Yesterday’s indictment of the state’s top construction union official on federal corruption charges raises a big question: if private companies are paying bribes to avoid having to work with certain construction unions, why is Governor Cuomo insisting that the state keep doing it? Read More

It’s Official: New York State’s Second Quarter Economic Crash Was the Worst on Record

Further evidence of the massive damage done to New York’s economy by the coronavirus pandemic shutdown has emerged in the latest gross domestic product (GDP) data from the federal Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Affairs. Read More

Subscribe

Sign up to receive updates about Empire Center research, news and events in your email.

CONTACT INFORMATION

Empire Center for Public Policy
30 South Pearl St.
Suite 1210
Albany, NY 12207

Phone: 518-434-3100
Fax: 518-434-3130
E-Mail: info@empirecenter.org

About

The Empire Center is an independent, non-partisan, non-profit think tank located in Albany, New York. Our mission is to make New York a better place to live and work by promoting public policy reforms grounded in free-market principles, personal responsibility, and the ideals of effective and accountable government.