> I know nothing about the SEIU CNA fight. But the way it is portrayed
> in this article it is a usual fight over jurisdiction between unions.
You're certainly correct to a large extent. On the other hand, there are more than enough unorganized workers to go around (over 100,000 unorganized RNs in CA for instance), the resources unions have to mount organizing campaigns are extremely limited, and hence there's no justifiable reason whatsoever for one union expending its members' money to tell other workers to "vote no" in a union election (as opposed to a message of "vote for union X over Y"). Because they haven't engaged CHP workers or held CHP accountable in a corporate social responsibility campaign for the past 3 years, the CNA is in no position to organize these RNs for the foreseeable future.