there is a difference between that and having a union protected by law. I believe people have a right to assemble but an employer should be able to fire those who do assemble
that in no way violates their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
just as you have a right to free speech but if you say stuff in the work place I don't like I can fire you and that is not a constitutional violation
Clearly an activist judge. This law has already been deemed Constitutional by the WI Supreme Court. My guess, they get the decision stayed until the WSC hears it.....again.
Sad day for the WI tax payers. Hopefully it will get corrected before long.
Omniscience just sucks without omnipotence!
and the 5 USC provisions were established to allow unions to restore balance to such inequitable work environments
Because often the unions are the masters of those bargaining "against them"
when I represented a company in a union negation the union was trying to increase its benefits but it was limited by two things.
1) what other members of the work force would work for
2) the health of the company
and I as the rep for management was bargaining for the best interest of management
however, in the public sector
the tax payers are on the hook to pay the public sector contracts
but the tax payers and the parents (in the case of teachers) are not properly represented at the bargaining table
in strong union areas the politicians are often elected with the help of the unions and are more beholden to the unions than the taxpayers.
These awful people who look at the law and act like tis. Who do they think they are, Judges?
I love the smell of face-palm in the morning!
"You ain't no Muslim bruv!"