From the way the article describes it, he’s basically trying to assert that the collective bargaining of the union is not the city council’s job, and is the sole responsibility of the mayor.
I guess the argument is that City council shouldn’t be trying to pass laws about compensation of union employees, as it violates the established collective bargaining rules.
Dunno if there’s more to it than that.
Allegedly the city council wrote it so it wouldn’t violate those laws though. And not sure why unions should need to bargain only with the mayor?
Allegedly the city council wrote it so it wouldn’t violate those laws though
I think this might be a poison pill. Democrats on the council aren’t exactly pro-union.
And not sure why unions should need to bargain only with the mayor?
That’s not so much the claim. The claim is that this is how all collective bargaining in the city is currently setup, and if there’s a precedent for that changes this for a single union, it could impact the ability of all unions to collectively bargain with city.
Zionazi “leftist” Mamdani showing his true colors…AGAIN LMBO! Liberals:
Eh. I think there’s a decent case here that NYC Democrats actually did this to hurt collective bargaining across the whole city. This particular action could be Mamdani leaning into the punch.
Not saying I disagree with your characterization of him, but this action might be justified within the context of maintaining the power needed to protect all workers
Me when I can’t read:
