Sen. Paul Gazelka, R-Brainerd, joined Sen. Dave Thompson, R-Lakeville, Thursday to announce their introduction of a constitutional amendment that would give Minnesotans the opportunity to vote on whether or not Minnesota workers should have the freedom to join a union or not. Currently, if someone is hired by a company with a collective bargaining agreement in place, that person is required to join the union or pay fair share dues.
“This is an employee rights bill and a jobs bill,” Gazelka said in a news release. Any employee should have the freedom to choose to join or not join a union and to pay or not pay union dues. This bill will make a union-employee’s union more responsive to his or her individual concerns. I’m proud to co-author this bill that puts decision-making back in the hands of the worker and helps our state economy move forward.”
If Minnesotans vote in favor of this amendment, every Minnesota worker would still have the right to join or support a labor union. Union employees would still be able to collectively bargain the same as under current law.
Thompson said states that have passed similar measures have experienced growth in business. He said from 1993 to 2009, private sector employment increased nearly 38 percent in those states versus only 19.6 percent in forced-unionism states.
Comments (70)
Add commentfinally
forced gunionism is not for the land of the free! if you want to join and have your dues go to the DFL it is your CHOICE. funny, one can CHOOSE to abort but can't choose to NOT be in a union!
Scorecard of past Legislators (house/senate) of Brainerd?
So, any one with a history background?
Since Brainerd was founded, and legislators of the house/senate have been elected since, how often did those folks author/co-author Minnesota Constitutional Amendments?
I hunch Paul Gazelka is leading the race by a wide margin at present. Perhaps it's the only way he knows or was trained on how to legislate.
Because of his re-election this fall in 2012 - It's a 4 year deal if he's re-elected. Want to roll the dice and see how many more Minnesota Constitutional Amendments are going to presented by Paul?
Luckily, the present experiement is since 2010 and only 2 years.
Jobs and the economy forgotten AGAIN
This is EXACTLY what you can continue to expect out of Paul Gazelka. His agenda was and still is focused on partisan politics and abortion as THE MOST important issues to work on while in the legislature.
First of all, unions in MN must separate out political activities from normal dues and inform members if they use dues for any political activities. In other words, moonhawk's assertion that dues are used for politics when the union member does not want them to be is completely false. Members have the choice on this and must be notified of political activity.
The real result of this action in states that have implemented it is that workers have lost wages. This assumption that people who decline to join a union will somehow be rewarded for that by higher pay from their employer--step back and think about that for a bit to see what you think might happen--doesn't hold true. Wages actually decline.
The other side of this issue is that unions spend money and time arguing for all benefits for all of it's members during contract negotiations. Most if not all of these benefits are passed along to all employees. So if this passed, non-union employees working alongside union employees would reap the benefits of union actions without having to pay a penny for it.
I do think a but more focus could be put on political activities amongst unions, though as mentioned it is already regulated. The state could codify a two rate system for unions I believe, get past some of the political rancor and actually put pressure on unions to put more effort into considering all sides of issues they face. In other words, if a union is authorized, everyone would pay, but the option would be there for those who did not want to be full members to pay less.
I believe this is already how it works in many unions in the state--but not all.
Like Crystal Sugar's union?
They're losing so now they're lobbying to destroy the company/ business.
Democracy in action - vote in or out...
At last count, 50.1 percent is a majority.
Unions are governed by the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board). If a company and it's employees votes a union out with 50.1 percent of the total, it's out. If it's 50.1 percent or more, it's in, and ALL the folks are covered by the same contract language.
About time
someone is willing to rein in out of control, out of touch union demands. Here in Brainerd along with the State of Minnesota the unions have been the cause of out pricing product in a global market so that people have lost jobs or forced plants to relocate or close down all together. Public workers unions have the strangle hold the taxpayer to a point that the school districts have to split out expenses in referendums and the community "rich" are those who are employed by the public sector and have union protection from those who employ them, the taxpayer.
Let Ward fight for the man who lost his dog in a trap, this will fight for the recovery of our economy that got caught in the union trap.
ProudRINO is liar?
ProudRINO is not correct when it states matter of factly that wages actually decline after RTW laws are passed.
An intentional lie, or....
Nothing says "limited
Nothing says "limited government' like a barrage of constititutional amendment proposals. Funny how the party seems to be championing choice here, yet that same line of thinking stops when it comes to marriage between two consenting adults of the same gender.
Hey Paul ???
Seems to me there are two classes of people who attack unions and union employees. First are the people who work for low wages and are not unionized. They simply want to drag down to their level of misery people who through education and hard work have a job that at least can pay the bills. Second are the wealthy and business owners. They are greedy selfish people and simply want to eliminate unions so they can reduce wages and benifits so they will have more for themselves. They can deny that this is they reason. [filtered word], anyone with a brain cell knows the real reason, greed and selfishness by those who already have a lot and want even more.
If you cut union workers pay, are you going to introduce legislation to reduce doctors, hospitals, dentists, lawyers, contractors fees ??? I bet not, never hear aword about that do we ???
Paul your can talk a good talk, but your true colors show all too well and you are not fooling everyone !!!
Try to read more than just the scroll at the bottom of
Faux news, Mr. Brown.
The two nearest right to work states are North and South Dakota.
Check out the stats for yourself. The average salary in those states is $3,000 to $10,000 less than it is in MN, depending on whether you use Dept. of Commerce or census bureau figures.
Studies that have taken steps to separate out the many factors that contribute to wage differences (government regulations, cost of living, health care cost differences etc.) have also shown that wages in a non-RTW state like MN are higher than wages in RTW states.
But again, please explain why the average employer--when given the option--would offer better pay and benefits to a non-union employee than a union employee? How is that going to work out in reality with people doing the same job, side by side?
I'm no fan of unions political activity. But again, there are other ways to get at the issue--this method doesn't produce the benefits claimed and is really just a union busting plan.
Oh no!
a faux news insult! you win, you win, I give up!
I suggest you diversify what you read if you are in search of real outcomes from real legislation. There is by no means a consensus on the long term changes in wages resulting from right to work legislation.
I just pointed out that you were either lying or wholly misinformed. No more no less. Just because you are ignorant or a liar doesn't mean the exact opposite point of view is correct. It only means you are wrong.
Where is your evidence
John Brown, that Rino is wrong?
?? for Rhino ...
... which economies are healthier, ND, SD or MN? Wages are marginally higher in MN due to the higher percentage of State government jobs, more than the positive impact of unionism.
If your particular union is truly a benefit to you, join it; just don't force others to so if they don't share your views.
lendad
"Wages are marginally higher in MN...."
In 2010 per capita income was almost $10,000 higher in MN than in South Dakota. I'd say that's more than marginal.
Galt, if you want to live in a low tax state and enjoy the ambience of wasteland, why not move to SD?
The one thing that scares me
The one thing that scares me is how Government constantly changes the constitution with the swipe of a pen. I thought the constitution was to be a guide, so much for that. I do however agree people should have the vote on issues and I really believe we should have a vote on every issue.
Here's the problem
You see, its this. It appears that Republicans are more concerned about how my $600 annual dues to my union are spent than they are about the tax rate of those who make money on their financial investments -- and I point to Mr. Romney as an example, who paid 15% on his investments and made 'a little money' (was it $375,000) on speaking engagements.
exactly, zachnos
Why are the loyal & local GOPers giving such support to an agenda that hurts them? Romney's effective tax rate is actually less than 15% as he is allowed many deductions.
Beating up on workers' rights which have pulled other non-union workers up in the salary schedules, seems a defeatist position to espouse.
Who is going to speak up for the middle class when we have made them cease to exist?
As for political spending, it is way out of control by both sides. Makes you wonder just what they are buying. Influence, power? Just what would make corporations and unions feel the need to spend so much? There should be limits. Maybe for every dollar spent on campaigns, they should have to donate a dollar to a charity. That would do more good, than the public being deluged with propaganda for a year.
Before jumping on the SD bandwagon...
you should really do an actual comparison of MN taxes. Most of the numbers quoted to arrive at MN tax rankings are based on "per capita" numbers. If people make more money, they tend to pay higher taxes. Since Minnesotans make more money per capita, we also pay more. Minnesota's state tax ranking per capita comes in at 12th but if you calculate that on income we come in 23rd highest and if you factor in federal we actually come in 32nd. I would say that MN isn't to bad of place to live if you use our rankings with the number of millionaires in the State where MN ranks 12th, WI 24th, IA 33rd, SD 47th and ND 48th. I even compared us to FL 18th and AZ 21st. So yes, we pay high taxes but we make more money than alot of our neighboring states so our effective tax rate is lower.
Political spending
I've heard that Mr. Obama plans to spend $1 Billion. I sincerely doubt that the 99% is giving it to him.
Question for Lendad
Since John Brown refused to answer it...please explain why the average employer--when given the option--would offer better pay and benefits to a non-union employee than a union employee? How is that going to work out in reality with people doing the same job, side by side?
Let's make the question local.
Take a teacher, or a local factory worker.
Say this passes and takes affect. And some teachers and factory workers decide to leave the union. Remember, unions will still be there in contract negotiations for union members.
Should the school district pay non-union teachers more than union ones? Should the factory owners do the same with their non-union staff working side by side next to union people?
How is that going to work?
Or take this into consideration. Would it be fair for your neighbor who lives just outside the city limits to receive full benefits of police and fire protection, snow plowing, street mainenance etc. while not having to pay a penny for it--while you are taxed for those services?
It soon becomes obvious that this proposal is less about choice than about busting unions up. If it was about choice, there are many better ways to address the problem, this is simply not even close to a feasible solution.
I don't know that you want to compare the dakota's to MN either, unless you are satisfied with simple numbers on a page.
I've lived in or spent a lot of time in both states. SD does not provide the infrastructure or amenities to grow business and jobs across the state--only in select locations while growth is strong (Sioux Falls for example) do they do so.
Travel through the rural areas and small towns. Absolutely horrible roads in many locations. No new construction. Limited government involvement in things we take for granted and expect like police, fire, roads, etc.
North dakota is on a temporary boom in the western part of the state, fueled by energy development. There it's just the opposite in economy--but the infrastructure problem is still the same. Not enough housing, police, fire, road maintenance etc. to keep up with the boom.
Look at what it's doing to those once safe, nice small ND towns too. High crime rates. Violent crime and drunkeness booming. Prostitution. Remember the school teacher/mother who was abducted by some of the new workers out there?
It's old west/gold rush situation. I know North Dakotans who have lived through that before and are now seeing it again, they like the money but hate what it's doing to their communities.
I have no idea how my
I have no idea how my previous post was suspicious? It was pretty black and white, my opinion is pretty clear. You may not agree with my opinion but try to be mature enough to dicuss the issue instead of trying the old tactic of attacking the messanger to take attention away from the real issue being discussed!
Am I a union supporter? Yup, because I have lived long enough, 64 years, seen enough to know that despite their shortcomings unions have helped rasie the standard of living for the American workers overall. I also have seen enough to know that without unions wages and benifits for workers in general will decline.
Seems some things never change. Seems politicians are masters at getting the public all stirred up about who is supposedly to blame for the ills of society, the economy, and what ever the current focus of the sheeple is. Most recently it has been popular and fashionable to scapegoat and demonize public employees, and unions. The way the politicians are spinning it, seems if we eliminate the unions, reduce public employee numbers and pay, then the world will be wonderful. Dream on, is anyone stupid enough to believe that? What about corporations like GE not paying any taxes on billions in profit? What about corporations offshore home offices so they totally avoid taxes? Billionaires paying lower tax rate than their office help?
Ok, so if you eliminate unions, cut number of public employees, reduce their pay and benifits, who is next to be the bad guy?
Here is a quote worth really thinking about: "In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist; And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist; And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew; And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."
.
merlyn and Rino
Please tell me when in history any state or the federal government abused and underpaid public employees. Or subjected them to health dangers to get rich. Most of us taxpayers aren't millionaires much less billionaires and we are the ones paying for their inflated union wages. Take the private sector to task, if you wish, but there is no place for a union in the government sector.
Fair share is just that
Unions negotiate for everyone. Everyone benefits from the bargaining process by better working conditions, benefits, and salary increases. So it is only right that these workers pay their fair share which is not membership in the union. The system is fair so why toy with it? This is union busting.
if something is not broke, why fix it?
I am very disappointed in our Senator.
Just keep squeezing the middle class worker.
gazelka just copies
GOPers in other states. They are marching to an agenda that doesn't even benefit them! They will not get re-elected if they continue to slap down everyone who is a public employee, union member, person of diversity, gay, and anyone with any compassion for those who have nothing. You can't insult the majority of people in this area and expect them to forget this fall.
Good luck Paul.
"their inflated union wages"
"their inflated union wages" ? By that do you mean a living wage, maybe even actually the so called middle class living?
Did you not get the point: "In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist; And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist; And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew; And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."
Simple question
How much money should a state employee make per year? This is not a trick question. Please answer honestly. How much money do you think a full-time state employee should make (on average)?
Ya right !
Not a trick question? Ya right? you know no matter the answer someone will find something about it to criticize because that is their real aganda it seems. Some form of entertainment for them I wonder?
What should state employees make. Well, first of all there are hundreds of job descriptions for the various state agencies, so you can not put a certain dollar amount on it and make it apply to everyone. But what is true is that wages should provide a middle class living for a family. What does that mean? Being able to pay the rent, make the car payment, buy clothes, but groceries, go to a movie a couple times a year, save enough you can pay for car repairs when that happens. Is that too much to ask ??? What about you, what do you deserve to make???
My wife recently had surgery and was in the operateing room for 2 hours. Yesterday we got the bill for the anatheisiologist, $2400.00. What do you say to that, not bad for 2 hours work, huh??? But where is the uproar for that from you??? Maybe that is what you make ???
@Merlyn
My post was not aimed at you specifically. I was asking the question to engage critical thinking. I hear people (not you) say "state employees make too much money", so I was curious as to what they thought "too much money" meant. Personally, I think you summed up how much they should make in easy to understand terms. thank you.
Well
Well, a state employee should not be paid sick days to travel to another state and trash their buildings in support of that state's union employees' fight against their employer. Every single one of them should have been punished and vacation days forfeited instead.
Mr. eyolf,
That was a profound and accurate statement, however, I'm sure that the union leaders and their lackeys in government won't pay very much attention to you.