On 2012-11-07, at 1:49 PM, Andy wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Wojtek S <wsoko52 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> As to the local elections, Maryland liberals favored in state tuition
>> for children of immigrants and same sex marriages, but rejected
>> collective bargaining for police officers in Montgomery county
>> http://www.gazette.net/article/20121107/NEWS/711079527/1007/montgomery-county-police-lose-effects-bargaining&template=gazette
>>
>> This goes with my earlier argument about entrepreneurial
>> libertarianism of the US middle class - more personal freedom, less
>> collective rights. Marv?
>
> I have a hard time reading too much into that one -- it was very
> vaguely worded and took some digging to understand what it was about.
The Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) previously had the right to negotiate the "effects" of department policies on their members regarding the use of weapons, conduct of raids and searches, personal information files, and other matters. The county removed these so-called "management rights" from the bargaining table. It was necessary for the FOP and its trade union and liberal allies to resist these rollbacks, but Wojtek misunderstands this struggle to have been a more overarching one against the county's "rejection of collective bargaining for police officers." That wording is his, and does not appear inn the news report he cited. In fact, the Montgomery county cops still retain the right common to all unions employees to collectively bargain pay, hours, benefits, and other standard working conditions. This was never at issue, as in Wisconsin and Ohio, and undoubtedly influenced the referendum outcome.
More info here:
http://voteagainstquestionb.com
http://www6.montgomerycountymd.gov/Apps/News/press/PR_details.asp?PrID=8947