The Washington State Labor Council posted this on their web site about the investigation into an e-mail this morning that lead to the death of the ‘worker privacy’ bill:

“The following statement regarding today’s developments surrounding the Worker Privacy Act is from Rick Bender, President of the Washington State Labor Council:
We regret the incident. It was a result of frustration with the legislature’s failure to protect workers’ rights in the workplace. Our job is to always protect workers’ rights.
We do not believe that any law has been violated and we have no additional comments until we know where this will go.
Thank you very much.”

Bender does not elaborate on what, exactly, the e-mail said. The council’s site still has a link urging members to “act now to support worker privacy,” that leads to this page, with a form letter to lawmakers. That letter does not include mention of campaign donations.

Here is what the Association of Washington Business had to say about today’s developments:

“Today’s decision to shelve the Worker Privacy Act will allow the Legislature to focus their efforts on revitalizing the economy and resolving the state budget,” said AWB President Don Brunell. “Legislators should put this issue behind them and turn their attention to the budget and how they plan to resolve the $8 billion state deficit.” Read the rest at the link above.

Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown has issued a statement saying that the Legislature views this as an isolated incident and will continue to work on bills that the stakeholders are supporting and/or opposing without regard to it. (But this bill, of course, is still dead.)

Tags: Labor relations

I just got an e-mail and phone call from Sgt. Freddy Williams with the Washington State Patrol about this morning’s press release on the investigation surrounding the ‘worker privacy’ bill.

Here’s what he can say (not much):

• The Washington State Patrol has received a request to look into potential criminal allegations surrounding communications pertaining to SB 5446 and HB 1528 – Worker Privacy Act.
• As with any on-going investigation, no evidence or further information will be released at this time.
• The WSP will be working hand in hand with prosecutors (We don’t know who may/may not have jurisdiction yet.) as we progress
• We just received the request and little in known at this time.
• The WSP is taking this very seriously as we do with any potential criminal allegations and will work closely with prosecutors to determine a course of action.

I asked Sgt. Williams whether he could clarify: Was this communication sent between or among lawmakers, between or among unions, between or among business … He said he didn’t know the answer, and even if he did, that would be considered evidence.

Tags: Labor relations

Just got a statement from Governor Chris Gregoire, House Speaker Frank Chopp and Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown: The so-called ‘worker privacy’ bill is dead and there’s now an investigation over whether an e-mail “linking potential action on the bill to campaign contributions” broke the law.

The “worker privacy” bill was listed as the labor unions’ top priority this session — and among the top bills to quash on a list from the Association of Washington Business. The bill would have barred employers from requiring employees to sit through meetings about religion or union matters. Here is our coverage.

The statement says: “We are no longer considering action on House Bill 1528 and Senate Bill 5446, also known as the Worker Privacy Act. Immediately upon becoming aware of an email linking potential action on the bill to campaign contributions, bringing the bill forward was no longer an option. The email raises serious legal and ethical questions.”

The three have passed the e-mail along to the Washington State Patrol for Investigation.

“The matter has been referred to the Washington State Patrol for investigation.”

The statement does not say who sent the e-mail, who received it or what comprised the alleged quid pro quo.

Here are the rules for lobbying groups’ dealings with lawmakers. Among them: (Lobbyists may not) exercise any undue influence, extortion, or unlawful retaliation upon any legislator by reason of such legislator’s position with respect to, or his vote upon, any pending or proposed legislation.

I have a call into the Washington State Patrol and will update as soon as I have more information.

Tags: Labor relations

I’m watching the Senate public hearing on the “Labor Privacy Act.”

During an exchange between Sen. Jenea Holmquist and one of the people testifying (whose name I did not catch), a point came up: What if the “required meeting” starts out with a prayer, but continues on as a regular staff meeting? Could you skip the prayer? Or would the employer not be able to make political and religious statements because it’s a required meeting?

It made me think: Every floor session begins with a prayer.

Tags: Labor relations

Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles just opened discussion on the “Labor Privacy Act,” which bars employers from requiring employees to listen to religious or political messages at work.

“There are 19 pages of people signed in and at least 20 who want to testify,” she said. So she’s calling people up in panels of three. Each panel will have 12 minutes.

The First Amendment is coming up quite a bit, even though only two people have testified.

Stay tuned. Oh, and it’s live on TVW, so you can literally stay tuned if you’re near a TV or computer. (You are.)

Tags: Labor relations

The Senate equivalent of the bill I wrote about this morning is also getting a hearing today. It’ll be at 1:30 and live on TVW.

Also, the Senate version is sponsored by: Senators Margarita Prentice, Jeanne Kohl-Welles, Karen Keiser, Joe McDermott, Darlene Fairley, Rosa Franklin, Adam Kline, Ed. Murray, Kevin Ranker, Rodney Tom, Paull Shin, Debbie Regala, Steve Hobbs, Claudia Kauffman, Craig Pridemore, Rosemary McAuliffe, Jim Kastama, Brian Hatfield, Eric Oemig, Karen Fraser, Ken Jacobsen,

In other words: Most of the Democratic caucus in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Tags: Labor relations