Vermont approves mandatory fees on non-union members

[xoxoxoBruce]

No problem, just pass a law that the unions don't have to represent non-members.

[footfootfoot]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

No problem, just pass a law that the unions don't have to represent non-members.

I'd be happy to because the nature of my employment is such that I derive none of the benefits that the unions have gotten for the non-union members.

We are at will pond scum employees, we are required to pay into a retirement account but have no other benefits of any kind.

If I'm work for hire, then let me make my choices about where my $ goes.

[xoxoxoBruce]

In that case, are you sure this applies to you?

[footfootfoot]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

In that case, are you sure this applies to you?

I haven't heard directly from the school yet, but the story said "Support staff" which is where I sit on the totem pole. We'll see. If it goes into effect next year it may be moot as my boss doesn't think my skilz match the required skilz for the job.

[xoxoxoBruce]

...that the hundreds of thousands in revenues generated by these so-called “fair share” fees could be misdirected towards union political activity.

There are very strict federal laws covering that activity so if it was detected it can be easily stopped. As a matter of fact union members have to sign off in writing on any portion of their money being used for political purposes.