Vermont’s Proposal 3 will limit future voices
Regarding Proposal 3 for the upcoming election: I moved to Vermont from Pennsylvania, where for many years, I was required to pay union dues (fair share) to the National Education Association (NEA), though I opted not to join the union.
While I agreed with some of what the NEA lobbied for, other priorities they had were in direct conflict with my views and I wondered how I could possibly have to financially support a lobbying organization as a condition of my public school employment. In 2018, as I was leaving Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court ruled in the Janus case that forcing public employees to pay union fees violates their First Amendment rights by compelling speech. This was a victory for employees who deserve a voice and choice, I thought. The right to organize is already guaranteed in our First Amendment rights, along with state and federal law.
Why would we want to limit our ability for public discourse regarding unions for the rest of time here in Vermont? If passed, you and I will pay to defend the lawsuits that will foreseeably ensue. National headlines will read: “Vermont takes further steps to discourage businesses from operating in the state.”
Voters say compelling speech through their state constitution will help to spark economic growth and improve the lives of Vermonters. So many of us work with, invest in, rely upon, and willingly support respectable for-profit and nonprofit organizations/businesses daily which is essential for satisfaction in our own lives as well as for our economy and the health of our communities.
And yet, we hear sweeping and often generic anti-“business” sentiments that seem to imply that businesses are out to get the “little guy” or whomever and someone (elected officials?) has to protect us from them. Protect us from ourselves, essentially.
Why would we choose to tie our hands behind our backs when it comes to discussing labor unions in the future? Proposal 3 begins by stating what we already have as citizens. It is not giving us anything more; it’s restricting our future voices.