Get free daily email updates

Syndicate this site - RSS

Recent Posts

Blogger Menu

Click here to blog

worldwide drugstorepremarin with worldwide shipping valtrex canadaand Im buy in online pharmacy and bactrim generic and clomid new zealand no rx.viagra australia without prescription. And you can order propecia best of medications arimidex
Richard Rider

Should it be illegal for traveling CA state workers to save taxpayers money?

Here’s further proof that California is run BY and FOR the labor unions — public AND private. The hotel workers labor unions are pushing through a bill to make permanent a 2015 law that temporally banned state workers traveling on business from using “shared economy” services — primarily rider sharing (“Uber”) and airbnb rentals. See the article below.

Doubtless this union effort is also backed by the dying taxi businesses and the rental car companies. I suspect the hotel industry is split on the issue, as the measure seeks to limit government worker stays at UNION staffed hotels — a long standing push by labor unions. MOST hotels are non-union, I believe.

These special interest groups — led by the “Unite Here” hotel lobby group — have informed their sycophants in Sacramento that henceforth state workers traveling on business shouldn’t be able choose a better service (highly responsive ride sharing is much quicker than cabs most of the time) that saves taxpayers money. Moreover, the state will be prohibited from negotiating better rates with Uber, Lyft, airbnb, etc. The fact that state workers prefer these services coupled with that the taxpayers almost always money on most such modern alternatives does not enter into the equation.

The bill passed the first legislative committee with UNANIMOUS support (where are the Republicans??). Let’s see how this plays out.

Is It A Bad Thing for State Workers to Save Taxpayers on Work Travel?

PACIFIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Is It A Bad Thing for State Workers to Save Taxpayers on Work Travel?

 

May 08, 2018 Tim Anaya

As the sharing economy has grown in California, we’re changing how we approach many common life transactions.

When we’re looking for a repair person to fix a broken toilet, now we might look to Thumbtack to bid out of the job when before we would have called a traditional plumber – at a higher cost.

I can’t remember the last time I called a taxicab to go to the airport or get a ride home after an evening with friends at a bar or restaurant. But I can surely remember using Uber or Lyft to get a ride home after every holiday party I attended last Christmas.

In researching hotel options for a trip I’m planning to London next year, I calculated that staying at an Airbnb could save us between $200-$300 per person over a traditional hotel. I’ve used Airbnb to book accommodations at apartments and condominiums in Barcelona, Sydney, and Auckland in the past, and saved significantly over a hotel in every city.

The savings do not only extend to personal travel. Employees can save for business travel when using any of these services. Taxpayers also save when state workers use these services for work travel. Yet, this has become the latest political hot potato at the State Capitol.

Unfortunately, the new economy and the sharing economy are running up against the defenders of the past once again in Sacramento.

The Sacramento Bee reports that Unite Here, the union representing hotel workers, is opposing a bill by Assemblyman Tom Daly, D-Anaheim (Assembly Bill 2777) that would make permanent a law passed in 2015 that allows state workers to use these sharing economy services while traveling on state business.

This effort is the latest move by the old economy to encourage their allies in the State Legislature to put the thumb on the scale and protect the old way of doing things.

The union wants state workers traveling for business to go back to the days of staying at a traditional hotel staffed by union hotel workers.

These so-called peer-to-peer services are popular with state workers. The Bee reports that 4450 state workers requested reimbursement for ridesharing rides, and 3800 requested reimbursement for staying at a short-term rental.

Unite Here argues that the state can’t establish contracts with Uber or Lyft for a cheaper state rate if this bill is extended. But this is mere grasping at straws. I know from my past working in state government that the state has contracted lower rates with various hotels, airlines, and rental car companies.

Surely, taxpayers are paying even less than the contract rate when state workers stay at an Airbnb or ride Uber or Lyft when traveling on state business. From my experience using these services while traveling for work, they almost always charge less than hailing a cab or renting a car.

The bill cleared its first committee hurdle with a unanimous vote in April but faces a long journey ahead to becoming state law.

Tim Anaya is Communications Director for the Pacific Research Institute.