Every year, the unions for Rhode Island public sector labor come forward seeking to ensure that contracts aren’t really limited to three years in length, as required by state law, but never actually end.  When labor lobbyists claim that a law they’re seeking is “neutral,” you can be almost certain that it’s slanted well toward their clients.

This year, though, an attempt at logic stands out in Jennifer Bogdan’s story:

Rep. John M. Carnevale, D-Providence, who sponsored the bill, rejected the idea that such a law would be costly to cities and towns. Those who speak out against it, do so out of emotion and because of misinformation, he said. 

“Some who have been against this in the past have said … should this become law in bad economic times there would be no incentive for labor to negotiate because the previous [contract] would continue,” Carnevale said.

“If you believe what you’ve heard, and you’re a logical person then you have to believe the mirror image of that. The mirror image of that is that in good times, there would be no incentive for municipalities to negotiate because in fact they would be afraid, they’d have to give more benefits to labor. I personally don’t believe either.”

This has a certain sense to it, but it’s built on the big lie of Rhode Island labor relations — namely that “management,” when that means elected officials, see themselves in a perpetual opposition to labor.  They don’t, and they’re not.  In many cases, they’re explicitly elected by labor.

In good times, therefore, they’re eager to negotiate, because they can give away enough to make the unions happy without upsetting taxpayers.

Of course, there are additional obvious considerations, too.  Given that the jobs are created by the municipalities, it’s clearly in the unions’ interest to ensure that contracts never actually end.  Moreover, it seems pretty certain that bad times will be more common in Rhode Island’s future than good times.