By Gene Kelly   The writer is a former Papillion-La Vista school board member and longtime participant in public-employee contract negotiations.

The Nebraska Commission of Industrial Relations (CIR) imposes employment contracts whenever the government or a public-employee union does not agree on the provisions of a new contract. Although this process has been in place for decades, its gradual effects are pushing government (and taxpayers) toward insolvency.

For those unfamiliar with the Nebraska public-employee contract process, here’s how it works:

>> A union is certified as the exclusive bargaining agent for a group of public employees. The union “bargains” for both its members and non-union employees.

>> Government officials (e.g., the school board, city council/mayor, county board, etc.) are designated as “management.” Elected officials or administrators negotiate for taxpayers.

>> A series of “contract negotiations” are conducted. At this point, both sides are far apart on compensation and contract provisions. Called the CIR “Kabuki dance,” these negotiations are for show. They are to establish a record of “bargaining in good faith” for any subsequent commission review.

>> Following the dance, the government adjusts its offer based on recently settled public-employee contracts. At this point, most contract negotiations are concluded.

>> In short order, the contract is put to a public vote by the respective city council, school board or county board. By law, this is the first time taxpayers may read the details of the proposed contract. It is too late to have any meaningful input — by design!

This entire Kabuki dance negotiation is driven by the threat of the CIR process. If the CIR is asked — by either side — to arbitrate a contract, it will do the following:

>> Select an “array” of cities, school districts, counties, etc. said to be similar to the government entity. Both sides can guess the likely array, as it is usually the one used in the most recent dispute.

>> Then the CIR decides what the contract settlement should be. The settlement is based on meeting the compensation of the array’s midpoint. Basically, it is a mathematical calculation.

So, the government and union might as well sign the contract based on the CIR calculations and save the legal fees. (Occasionally, a dispute goes to the CIR. But this is just to show voters or union membership that each side is a “resolute” bargainer.) This well-known CIR process works as an upward ratchet to increase public employees’ compensation.

Your city, county or school employees are granted the same compensation as others’ city, county or school employees. So, if the Grand Island school district is generous with its employees, the Papillion school district will be forced to be equally generous. Next year, Papillion’s generosity will be used to push up Grand Island’s compensation.

Gradually, these compounding increases move public-sector pay and benefits well above the open-market rates. These increases also freeze work rules, vacation and sick-day policies and let both union and government officials shirk their respective duties — all with the taxpayers footing the bill.

So, public-employee unions benefit from the CIR process because it ratchets up their compensation and they never need to prepare a credible threat to strike. Government officials like the CIR because it avoids unsightly labor strife as well as their obligation to make difficult decisions. Government officials never have to refuse pay and benefits increases, threaten to hire replacements or realign government operations.

The CIR process also institutionalizes a colossal conflict of interest found in most legislative, county, city and school board campaigns in Nebraska: Many elected officials take union endorsements, contributions and campaign manpower for elections from the very same unions with which they will then vote on contracts — as the taxpayers’ representatives!

That’s why police and fire unions are so involved in city elections and why the teachers union is so interested in school board elections. They just need to control a few to continue the upward ratcheting of the compensation.

The CIR and its attendant negotiation process should be eliminated. Instead, Nebraska should adopt the private-union/private-company model: If the union thinks its members are undercompensated, they should threaten a strike if not compensated well. Likewise, if government management thinks it is overpaying for services, it should consider replacement of overpriced service providers or a reduction in compensation.

In that real world of union/management negotiations, no Kabuki dance talks would occur. It is serious negotiation for serious issues. Nebraska should join the real world.