As the full House of Delegates prepares for a vote on the right-to-work bill on Thursday, the Teamsters Union announced it will file a lawsuit seeking full copies of redacted emails concerning a disputed-West Virginia University study of right-to-work laws.
The study, by WVU professor John Deskins, makes the case that a right-to-work law would increase economic growth and job creation in West Virginia.
A Freedom of Information Act request filed with WVU for documents related to the study yielded 34 emails between Deskins and Richie Heath, chief counsel for Senate President Bill Cole, R-Mercer. Dan Greear, chief counsel for House Speaker Tim Armstead, R-Kanawha, is copied on most of the emails but does not appear to have written any.
But those emails are heavily redacted, with some messages blacked out in their entirety.
"The people of West Virginia have a right to know the truth behind how this study came about," Ken Hall, Teamsters general secretary-treasurer and president of Teamsters Local 175 in South Charleston, said in a prepared statement. "This issue is critical to the future of workers in this state."
The study, whose methodology has been contested, was written at Cole and Armstead's request and cost $34,000.
"There is no logical reason to refuse disclosure of the substantive conversations contained in these emails," said Michael J. Del Giudice, attorney for the Teamsters with Ciccarello, Del Giudice & LaFon.
In making the case for right-to-work, Republican legislators have leaned heavily upon the study.
"This study should encourage us to break from the status quo and fully pursue making West Virginia a right-to-work state," Cole said in November, when the study was released.
When the bill was being debated on the Senate floor two weeks ago, Senate Majority Leader Mitch Carmichael, R-Jackson, repeatedly cited Deskins' credentials in making the case for right-to-work.
"We have a study from a Ph.D. economist at our flagship university in West Virginia - nobody here is a Ph.D. economist, right?" Carmichael said. "We have a Ph.D. economist who says the following: 'Passage of this bill will result in more jobs.'"
The bill passed the Senate on a 17-16 party-line vote.
Unions and Democrats dispute that the bill will bring more jobs, arguing that it will weaken unions and lower wages.
The right-to-work bill will be up for a vote before the full House of Delegates on Thursday after delegates changed the bill's enforcement mechanisms and penalties Wednesday.
The changes, sought by House Judiciary Chairman John Shott, R-Mercer, seek to address concerns raised last week that the bill will open employers up to frivolous lawsuits based on their hiring practices.
Right-to-work laws allow employees in unionized workplaces to opt out of paying union fees, even though the union must continue to represent them in negotiations and grievance hearings.
The bill contains civil and criminal penalties for any employer who declines to hire someone for not paying union fees.
Last week Shott's committee heard from Lane Ferguson, the owner of Nitro Construction Services, who said that provision would make him a "sitting duck" for lawsuits filed by non-union members who, for whatever reason, did not get hired.
A change to the bill (SB 1) requires that a person "knowingly" violates its provisions before they can be punished. The criminal penalty remains a misdemeanor, but would be punished by a fine of $500 to $5,000, rather than $500 to $5,000 per day of the violation, as had previously been the case.
With the House galleries once again packed with union members who strongly oppose the bill, the changes passed on a voice vote, with Democrats in loud opposition.
Reach David Gutman at david.gutman@wvgazettemail.com, 304-348-5119 or follow @davidlgutman on Twitter.