Seems to me that this vote flies in the face of Republican
goals for Michigan to become a ‘right to work’ state – or do they. It will be interesting to see how our
recently elected representatives negotiate their way around the notion of which
union is more ‘deserving’ than another……given their (not all) own associations with one
or more of the various unions.
The notion that arbitrators might be required to consider
the financial ability of the community to ‘pay’ is ridiculous. That should be left to the individual
communities and the taxpayers. This vote is more accurately characterized as a 'rollover' in favor of the unions.
2) Re: 2011 House Bill 4522 (Require public safety arbitrators consider fiscal interests) by wjhill on May 18, 2011
How will the abritator acquire such information when municipalities do not honestly reveal their financial standings. I hope you are not considering heresay!
3) Re: 2011 House Bill 4522 (Require public safety arbitrators consider fiscal interests) by gypsy on April 19, 2011
Arbitrators have no business considering the ability of a locality to pay for the services it wants. That is up to the voters.
View pre-2013 Comments.