Collective Bargaining Modernization Act of 2014 (Veto Overriden)

[windjammer]

Well,
If I understand correctly, this bill ends basically the potential problem of a union representing workers but not being allowed to receive "union dues", you know the princip of "right-to-work". So I will vote for this bill.
I just would like to slightly modify 1d and 1e:
-the wording of 1d is too vague, how can a representation fee be considered as "excessive"?
-1f: there are many workers at minimum wage, right? So, that risks to represent an important cost for the federal government. I would prefer a gradual financial help made on the basis of income rathen than totally subsidizing it, or something similar .

[windjammer]

Well,
I will still vote for this bill .
I will introduce amendments in the coming days!

[windjammer]

Before writing the amendment, I made some search and it appears on average, union dues are globally 400 dollars a year per person.

Is it correct???

[windjammer]

Before writing the amendment, I made some search and it appears on average, union dues are globally 400 dollars a year per person.

Is it correct???

[windjammer]

Before writing the amendment, I made some search and it appears on average, union dues are globally 400 dollars a year per person.

Is it correct???

No one can confirm?

[windjammer]

Before writing the amendment, I made some search and it appears on average, union dues are globally 400 dollars a year per person.

Is it correct???

No one can confirm?

If you found a reliable source stating as much, why would you need others to confirm your findings?

Because I m not sure this is a reliable source

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: TNF
[/quote]

Please Bore, Ii'm not posting that as an amendment, I would like to have the opinion of my colleagues.

I'm sorry for having been late but I'm definitely not sure if union dues are on average 400 dollars a month per person. My amendment would just try to fix 1d because I believe right now, this is a bit vague.

[windjammer]

Bump

[windjammer]

I don't think it's the place of the federal government to limit what can be agreed upon in the form of union dues, to be frank.

So you want to get rid of 1d completely?

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: TNF
[/quote]

Here is my amendment,
1d is too vague to be enforceable, that's the reason. And I quite agree with TNF as well.

[windjammer]

Well this has been here a while with virtually no debate.
Senator Windjammer's amendment is referring to a point most Senators and most of the public frankly don't care, the "big" question, in my eyes, whether or not unions exceeding membership of a certain part of employees should be allowed to bargain for their whole sector, remains untouched. The debate here seems to have slept in, so I wonder if it wouldn't be time to proceed to a final vote?

Well this is our duty to try to write the Best possible laws

[windjammer]

Am I dreaming TNF, or you seem to have even more moved to the left since the result of the last election?

[windjammer]

I motion for a final vote.

[windjammer]

Aye

[windjammer]

4 senators who failed to vote (well, except BK who is on leave of absence), this is unacceptable.

[windjammer]

Motion for a veto override.

I second the motion, mainly because I don't like Presidential vetoes, same as Presidential pardons and most executive orders (but nominations, and in times like the Civil War)

Thirded.

Yes Cranberry, it's time to get rid of this presidential system.

[windjammer]

Aye

[windjammer]

The last time a veto has been overriden was during bgwah's presidency in 2009.