I am no expert, but here is what I realized after watching many hours of middle-of-the-night legislative wrangling in our state legislature:
Only three or four DFL legislators were willing to even entertain the idea that unionization was not appropriate for family child care providers. Only one or two would vote against it.
Legitimate questions were ignored or flat-out lies were told.
IF the union would be voted in (by a "voting group" that is set up to exclude a majority of family child care providers) the union would be bargaining for higher rates WITH THE LEGISLATURE. So -- if the legislature wants higher rates, why not skip the unneccessary middleman and just approve higher rates??
Repeatedly, the distorted representation was that state funds subsidize child care providers. They do not. They subsidize the cost of child care FOR FAMILIES with children.
My take-away: Unions want to get into our purses. Democrats are reluctant to vote against this because they will look bad to somebody (the unions? the working man/woman?) What the unions SAY they want to do, can easily be done without the union, by the same legislators who want the union. If your state is majority Democrat, it is hard to fight the union machine. I say this as a life-long (former)Democrat, and daughter of a proud union man.

Reply