[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 85 (Tuesday, June 9, 2009)]
[House]
[Page H6311]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  INTRODUCING THE RAISE ACT, H.R. 2732

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McClintock) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Speaker, if the gentleman from Kentucky wants 
to know why Republicans oppose the government takeover of our health 
care system, I would invite him to consult the many, many refugees from 
Canada and Britain who have come here to America to get their health 
care, because they simply can't survive with bureaucrats telling them 
what treatments they'll get and when they'll get them.
  The Republicans are proposing to bring within the reach of every 
American family a basic health plan that they will own, that they can 
change if it fails to suit them and that they will hold wherever they 
work and under whatever circumstances they work; but Madam Speaker, I'm 
here on different business this morning.
  I'm here to talk about the right of workers. Their right to gather 
and to bargain collectively with an employer is a fundamental right of 
labor. It often strengthens the position of individual workers as they 
negotiate with a powerful employer. Yet survey after survey tells us 
that union members are less satisfied with their jobs than nonunion 
workers, and many Americans today simply refuse to work in union shops 
at all.
  So why is it that a bargaining process designed to improve workers' 
satisfaction should produce such dissatisfaction?
  Perhaps the answer rests with the simple human desire in each of us 
to excel in what we do and to be recognized and rewarded for that 
excellence. Collective bargaining increases the ability of workers to 
take a stronger position to negotiate with an employer, and this is 
good, but they're then left to give up any individual rewards for 
outstanding work.
  Union workers end up trapped with a one-size-fits-all contract that 
denies them the dignity that comes from individual excellence and 
achievement. No matter how hard that worker toils or no matter how much 
he produces, he gets paid exactly the same as the coal worker who puts 
in minimal effort.
  Well, why shouldn't workers get extra pay and performance bonuses 
beyond 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?
  Union leaders may see value in wiping out individual initiative to 
build solidarity among rank-and-file members, but those workers would 
be far better off if they could enjoy both the advantages of collective 
bargaining and the additional rewards of individual performance raises 
and bonuses. Many unionized businesses would gladly pay individual 
workers more if they could. Some have tried, but over the years, the 
National Labor Relations Board has repeatedly struck them down.
  For that reason, I have introduced the Rewarding Achievement and 
Incentivizing Successful Employees, or RAISE Act, H.R. 2732. It will 
allow working union members to escape the false choice between 
collective bargaining and individual reward that our outdated labor 
laws have forced upon them. Senator Vitter has introduced a similar 
bill in the Senate.
  Under the RAISE Act, union members would retain all of the collective 
bargaining rights under current law, and employers would be bound to 
the wage and benefit schedules negotiated under those laws. 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, Admiral Grace Hopper observed that, in all of her years in 
the United States Navy, she had determined that the greatest impediment 
to human progress is the phrase ``but we've always done it this way.'' 
That's the only answer we've heard so far in opposition to this simple 
reform, and in days like these, that's no answer at all.

                          ____________________