Minnesota's child-care union debate hitting home

  • Article by: Jim Ragsdale , Star Tribune
  • Updated: September 16, 2013 - 8:26 AM

Passions and activism run strong on both sides of what is a national issue.

  • 41
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
jpcooperSep. 15, 1310:12 PM

"Joan Wenning of Holdingford said the rules can defy common sense, yet providers have little chance of prevailing if they challenge an adverse ruling. Kelly Martini of Avon and others said they worry about being issued a “correction order” for a technical violation that could damage their reputation and require costly expenditures. A seat at the table with state and county regulators, with a powerful union such as AFSCME behind them, was regarded as preferable to the independent, private-business model union opponents extol.

Ladies, you run a business, you are subject to regulations, laws, rules etc set by the State, Counties and Cities your business resides in. Those rules oversee, licenses, number of kids, the premise you do business in, Fire codes, etc.... Restaurants, bars, Hair Salons etc are no different. What you need is a lobby,not a Union!

DufferHSep. 15, 1310:26 PM

"Rabble-rousers" Would the reporter please explain the reason for this obviously loaded language? Does he have a dog in this fight?

LilBeaverSep. 15, 1311:20 PM

The Democratic legislature got their palms greased again! One of the many times it happened this past session!

freedommarySep. 15, 1311:24 PM

Too much rhetoric about losing self-employed independence and about there being no benefit from those quoted in opposition. Just more of the same old stuff to convince people the some big, bad union wanting to take over child care businesses. If you think that, you know nothing about unions and just a pawn foolishly helping to return this country to the rich. If you don't know what a difference unions have made to working people and society, then do some history reading before you demonize this movement. There really is a need for some education to happen here like someone said in this article, but it isn't from these anti-union voices. Everything the anti-union people said doesn't even make good logic - 1st off: why on earth would a union want to have anything to do with controlling how you do your business? why would that benefit the union? why would that benefit the members? Unions are their members, like the quote at the end of the article says. Unions work to ensure people are treated fairly and paid fairly. Why shouldn't the people who take care of our kids have a way to make sure they are treated fairly by the state? Doesn't seem like too much to ask!

MinfidelSep. 16, 1312:01 AM

Unions are their members? That must be why two-thirds of the public union members in Wisconsin bolted "their" unions in Wisconsin at the first opportunity when they were no longer mandated by law to join.

lisaswartSep. 16, 1312:04 AM

These child care providers aren't saying they don't want regulations or that they don't want to follow the rules. They are saying they just want to ensure they are treated fairly. You're right, jpcooper, they also need a lobbyist! And the best way for us to have a lobbyist that democratically works for our needs is as a union! Contrary to the incorrect statements from the ones against a union, we will ALWAYS be independent small business owners and most us would rather be caring for the children in our care than lobbying down at the capitol in St. Paul or in DC! (not to mention that would be impossible)

krugerscottSep. 16, 13 1:55 AM

y wife was forced to join AFSME and she has hated it ever since.They have done 0 for her and except for collecting their union dues and trying to tell her how to vote she never hears from them.This class warfare the unions wage makes me sick, its all about the rich this and the rich that.How in the world does not having a union in the child care business give the country back to the rich.Just plain old union rhetoric from back in the day.Its all about the union dues and the political power the unions buy.

fwallenSep. 16, 13 3:20 AM

I have nothing against unionization. Before living in Minnesota I was a member of a union by my choice. In MN I was forced into an ineffective union which did nothing for me but take my money and enrich the leaders and their friends in the legislature. Day care workers had an opportunity to form a union if they wanted, and unions could have made efforts at unionization. But Dayton did not want to follow the existing procedures. So he changed the laws to tilt in favor of forced unionization. Minnesota has inflated costs for all govt functions with the money paid by public employees recycled into the leaders and legislators pockets!

tnesleySep. 16, 13 5:31 AM

The only winner on this is Union leadership. Daycare providers will have to raise their rates, when most are already running a tight budget, to compensate for Union fees. Dumbest thing I have every heard of.

dbcybbSep. 16, 13 5:50 AM

So, if a proposed regulation reduced the ratio of providers to child (thus increasing provider's/parent's cost but increasing union membership) does anyone really think the unions would be the provider's advocate?


Comment on this story   |  


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters