Conservatives set to table bill forcing unions to open books

Looks like a play taken directly from Karl Rove's handbook.

It's no surprise you are against unions behaving like any other company.

After all, who knows what we may find when the books are open ?

It's no surprise you are against unions behaving like any other company.

After all, who knows what we may find when the books are open ?
All companies that sell stocks, what we call "public companies", have to open their books to the public. Those that do not, including unions, don't have that obligation... until now.

There are some exceptions, like charities.

Why should unions be able to keep their books a secret especially from their dues paying members?

Do political parties need to keep open books? I genuinely don't know.

I can understand this if the union has a contract with a public corporation.

Membership in a political party is voluntary. Membership in a union generally is not. If you're willing to allow Right To Work laws and make union membership 100% voluntary in any workplace then I'd be right with you on that comparison.

If you're in a union, you're essentially buying a service. I can't think of any other "service" company that you'd asked to see their books.

Some unions have strike funds but I'm not sure though they're obligated to have these but if I paid dues to a union that did, I'd be interested to know what was in it. As a lot of people, I'd like to see the books of my union, just to see how my money was being spent.

A Union's books are completely open to the members. What else is necessary? A political Party relies on public donations and public moneys. It must be accountable to the public. The books f arivate corporation are not open unless it goes public.

And I can't think of any other "service" company that forces you to pay for their service(s).

What is the downside to it?

And I can't think of any other "service" company that forces you to pay for their service(s).
You're not forced.

Nothing forces employees to unionize... if you are, you can go through the decertification process or force a deauthorization election in the middle of a contract.

And I can't think of any other "service" company that forces you to pay for their service(s).
You're not forced.

Nothing forces employees to unionize... if you are, you can go through the decertification process or force a deauthorization election in the middle of a contract.
Really? So all those people that had union dues deducted from their cheques before they were even union members weren't forced to pay them?
I look back at the days of the 89 Day Wonders in Windsor. These were people that were hired by unionized companies, primarily the auto industry, and then let go after 89 days to prevent them from becoming union members. It was a bit of a dirty trick on the part of the auto manufacturers but...all those 89 DAy Wonders still had union dues deducted despite having zero representation. Not one, not ONE of them ever saw a refund of those dues.
When I worked for RevCan, I had to fork over union dues to PSAC, and I was just a friggin' temp!! I also had no representation despite being forced to pay dues.
And finally, the pack mentality of most unions makes it near impossible to "opt" out of the union and still continue working at that job.

Oddly here you need to have only 51% of the employees who want a union to make it so. To boot the union back out of the workplace you need (going by memory) 75%+ of the vote.