3 ms·

Genuine question: how is it possible that a union couldn't arrange an election once a year? Over here they can do it, and routinely do it annually or bi-annuall

• makomk 12y ago
  That's a good question. The law in question looks nasty: it requires them to hold an election annually, and if they don't get 51% of the votes of all employees "affected general municipal employees may not be included in a substantially similar collective bargaining unit for 12 months from the date of decertification". However, the vote is effectively only binding in one direction: even if they do get 51% of the vote, when it comes time to negotiate the employer can claim they don't represent the employees and refuse to negotiate with them until they hold another election to prove they do. So I can't find any provision that makes it expensive to hold elections, but it does seem to be basically pointless since they've rendered unions so ineffective. Even if they do manage to jump through all the hoops the only thing public sector unions are allowed to bargain over is base wages, not overtime pay, benefits like health insurance, working conditions, or anything else.