Well that's certainly a mature and well-reasoned response.Union leaders said they were prompted to act because business groups are pushing a ballot question that would ask voters to make Colorado a "right-to-work" state, meaning that joining a union or paying union fees could not be a condition of employment.
"We saw that if right to work is something voters approve in November, eventually — inevitably — workers' rights are going to suffer," said Manny Gonzales, a spokesman for the food workers union.
Business groups said Monday that the right-to-work ballot proposal came only after increased activism by unions.
"The unions started this," said Dan Pilcher, a spokesman for the Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry, which supports the right-to-work proposal.
Besides being an embarrassingly childish response Pilcher is factually incorrect. Pro-business pols and organizations have been stoking the right-to-work fire for a year now in an attempt to intimidate unions and Democratic politicians and drive Republican voter turnout.
Right-to-work is really about right-to-free-ride. It allows employees to opt out of paying union dues while keeping those same employees in the bargaining pool when the union negotiates new contracts and terms. In other words a worker can opt out of paying union dues but the union is still required to bargain on their behalf for things like increased wages and benefits. It's a pretty neat deal - you get the higher wages and better benefits of union jobs and you don't have to pay any of the cost.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention that one of the main backers of the right-to-work movement in Colorado is facing some serious ethical charges,
The lawsuit comes a month after Hines and union groups began asking Frazier to explain $1,500 in campaign contributions he received from partners of Carollo Engineers the same day the council voted to award the firm a $9.6 million contract as part of a major water project.
No comments:
Post a Comment