Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: monocle

“If unions have to spend money for such votes, they will have less to spend to support Democrats.”

There has to be a better rationale for an annual vote — something to do with protection of the workers, or the public interest. A strictly punitive measure, that’s designed only to bleed funds from the unions, cannot be justified. Such things have a way of circling around, and biting us in the rear.

If a Governor is elected for 4 years, couldn’t a union be certified for 2 years — or longer, if there is a longer-term union contract in place?


19 posted on 12/20/2013 12:28:11 PM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

People working in in these jobs are compelled to join the union. It seems fair that there should be a regular vote as to whether the union still represents the interests of those workers. Maybe every two or three years would be OK but previously the unions had a permanent control of these jobs.


22 posted on 12/21/2013 2:08:39 PM PST by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson