Union, DFL jointly thumb their noses at the law

  • Article by: Steve Drazkowski and Joyce Peppin
  • Updated: September 26, 2013 - 7:33 PM

The situation has to do with the ‘fair share’ fees paid by those who don’t join.

  • 68
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
elmore1Sep. 26, 13 8:00 PM

It should be Union/DFL not Union,DFL. Those of us who are moderates have been watching how Dayton and the majority party continue to be puppets to the unions and their regressive agenda. They don't represent the 90% of us who are common sense and non union.

jbpaperSep. 26, 13 8:00 PM

Is this the same union that is defending the members of the law enforcement community that broke the law by illegally looking at drivers' licence information?

ruphinaSep. 26, 13 8:05 PM

This brings to mind a simple question: Why aren't public union terms routinely made public? Why is it a secret how the DFL/Union cartel is spending our money? Bill G.

jbpaperSep. 26, 13 8:23 PM

When it comes to shortfalls for their pensions, they keep saying "we" made promises to them that they would receive their benefits. When it's only one party, one that they helped elect, is it really "we" that made the promises?

shushyn78Sep. 26, 13 8:45 PM

Scoundrels and miscreants exposed for the frauds they are. Legislative protection racket.

swschradSep. 26, 13 9:03 PM

obviously, these two House members have not been bounced out of a job because the boss woke up on the wrong side of the bed, and took it out on the first person they saw. come election day, the state owes them that opportunity. after all, they are not covered by a bargained contract that mandates clear and unambiguous standards, and a process of appeal in case it was a spiteful deal. perhaps they can learn a useful trade instead of spouting off on things they know nothing about. in a Fair Share shop, all the workers benefit from the work the union does.

davehougSep. 26, 13 9:27 PM

in a Fair Share shop, all the workers benefit from the work the union does. - - - TRUE, but the fair share is NOT supposed to cover political campaigns or lobbying. NOT every union member approves of the political stance and thus have a chance to not pay for that. However, if the calculation is secret or always works out to the maximum.......

pumiceSep. 26, 13 9:40 PM

Is the 1 out of 10 state employee labor unions accused by Drazkowski and Peppin of flouting the law and political collusion the same union which endorsed Tim Pawlenty for governor and Norm Coleman for US Senator? the union whose Wisconsin twin endorsed Scott Walker for governor and was subsequently excused from Walker's collective bargaining changes?

luzhishenSep. 26, 1310:43 PM

Why aren't public union terms routinely made public? - Go see the 990s yourself...they are available online. Unions have to send out fair share notices that have lots of info in them as well.

martytoilSep. 26, 1310:52 PM

If anyone can read this editorial and not see the complete and total bias from the authors, then perhaps our reading skills education in this state needs to be revamped.


Comment on this story   |  


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters