CHICAGO (Feb. 9, 2014) – Today, Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner issued an executive order to stop collecting “fair share” union dues from people who work for state government but who have opted out of being a union member.
Illinois does not have Right-to-Work law. Because of this, most government workers must pay money to a union in order to keep their job. Employees who choose not to belong to the union are forced to pay “fair share” dues to the union instead. However, today’s executive order ends that practice.
An Illinois Policy Institute report,“Anatomy of influence: Government unions in Illinois,” illustrates how government unions use the money collected through forced dues.
Please read the entire article on the web site
https://www.illinoispolicy.org/press-releases/breaking-news-gov-rauner-issues-executive-order-halting-collection-of-fair-share-union-dues-for-employees-of-state-government/
22 comments:
Outstanding! One step closer!
Great news! Using the Obama tactic against the Dems - I'm sure this will be challenged in the courts. But unless it gets overturned - the unions stop getting the money! Again - excellent news!
The democrats will need to go change their underwear ...finally
The Good ole boys network did it again at Mondays council meeting. Ald. Perez said at 7:25 they were all handed a 25 page government agreement between the city and the school district to demolish Washington school and none of them read it not even the school superintendent. Ald Perez asked to have time to read it and the council said it didn't need to be read and council passed it without reading anything.
Doesn't make sense to not take the time to read a contract that involves over $1,000,000 when time is spent forever on discussions for dog sled pulls in city parks , firework shows conducted without a contract and always at same top cost , pickle ball and Concerts for a Cause at the Airport.
The present administration and council are the most lacking of knowledge of any management group in the history of Peru!
Does anyone recall two important topics in Peru politics? Term limitation and a run off of two candidates when more than two are initially running in the Mayors race?
Anon 10:14 Who ever confirmed that all members of the council can read?
3:39 or graduated from High School.
3:37 what was this contract that was 1,000,000? And who is involved in those discussion about dog sled, fireworks, pickle ball?
10:14 I was informed that contract was 5 pages and discussed by the council a two previous meetings. The agreement holds the school district responsible for the total demo of the school. That's It.
4:35, it's never that simple. I would never vote to approve something I hadn't read first.
4:35 you're wrong. I browsed the agreement order and made sure to count the pages. There are 16 pages in that file. Not 5 there are 16. Even if there were only 5 an intelligent business person knows never to take the word of a contract or agreement without not only reading it but making sure what's written is indeed factual. Especially when it comes from an attorney which that did.
School board member told me today how wrong it was for elected officials to do as they did and not took the time to go through it when according to the board member the council was told by the school board to hold it until the next weeks meeting.
We have a well wonderful school board, well educated and conduct business honestly, unlike our city council and mayor. I personally know school board members. Great people.
@10:18pm what adjectives first come to mind when discussing Peru politicians?
10:18 ONLY 5 PAGES..... and the city made the agreement. Please be truthful. The agreement is in the hands of the school board. All the members of the city read the agreement, reviewed the agreement, discussed the agreement. Yes, there one council member that wanted to stall the process and to save the building. A few problems with any delay is that the school board may not be able to get the current bond rate to make the deal productive. And according to the news the board had gone through the saving of the building and determined the best course was to demolish.
Another fact is that the city can only vote at regular meetings, every two weeks. And school boards meet monthly.
8:46 AM Unqualified.
8:46 Arrogant
8:46am Untrustworthy
It is very evident that most decisions made by Peru government are of a must do immediately emergency environment, WHY?
Why does the school decision have to be made immediately? My 1st concern would be that the children have a new school prepared for occupancy on time and they are in it. In the meantime demolition plans can be prepared and than started after occupancy of the new school?
Why the precautions? Because historically anything associated with Peru government and it s right now attitude has been a utter catastrophe, Recent demolition of the electric power plant and a overnight sale of a building for a quick development are perfect examples of 500 feet of screwing up by city decision makers and no need is to list all.
Efficient business calls for presentation made at one meeting and action taken at the next as tradition has called for well over 100 years. Presently the best and only thing about anything being done in Peru about the school situation is that the school board has made ample preparation and all intelligent decisions.
9:27 that is a good point. Boss Harl has learned to manipulate the council without appearing to do so. He does this precisely as you say - by causing a requiring to act immediately. It is either falsely perceived to be an immediate requirement or turned into an immediate requirement through inaction by city management. Either way, that is how Boss Harl gets things done. I suppose he learned this through the example of people like Chicago Mayor Emanual or possibly this is what they teach them at "Illinois Democrat School."
Anon 10:46 AM 9:27 AM here, As for a small city such as Peru I am sure there has always been a minimum of party politics. I don't believe a minimum does any harm but to remain a healthy government for Peru it should stay a minimum and hopefully representation of all including political parties.
Thanking you for your answer, it is so enjoyable to hear anothers' view when they are not insulting. Again, Thank you.
9:27
The plan has been on-going with the School District for a long time. The kids will be housed in a new building that is currently being constructed. In addition the school felt that to be good ambassadors it was in the best interest of the community to get rid of the old building.
The city has been involved by re-marketing the bonds that will create additional revenue for the construction of the new building.
You want this to sound like a hasty deal, its quite the opposite.
Why Alderman Perez voted no on the deal?
1. Getting rid of the building is not what he wanted?
2. Refinancing the bonds to create hundreds of dollars for construction. And without any city or school liability?
Why Harl wanted to get this done? The school was under a time line to refinance the bonds for the best rates. And finalize the demo of the school?
Anon 10:29 No I do not want to make this sound like a hasty deal, but since the contract was handed to the council members at 7:29 for a 7:30 meeting and asked for a vote that evening when traditionally a vote is taken the meeting after presentation I would say it is not the opposite of a hasty deal.
The question is not why Harl, CEO of the city not the school wanted to get this done but rather why is it "always a must do now immediately" situation with Harl?
If, as you say the school was under a time line to refinance bonds for the best rates why didn't they contact the proper individuals to call and publish a special meeting? This is a suggestion that either side could implement and would have created no hardships to either side.
Whatever could cause a instant vote that evening to be so critical to the demolition of the school? What is the date that the demolition will start, surely that date has to be set by now to get this done as the vote had to be taken that night. Demolition isn't even a reasonable excuse as well as a reason. Past lack of TRANSPARENCY has caused everything reasonable or unreasonable to be questioned that pertains or is associated with Peru Politics.
Anon 3:29 PM You are so correct that to utilize demolition as a reason for a decision made in the same meeting as a written presentation is not sensible and only a test of how far the Peru mayor and city representation can pull the citizenship's puppet strings:
Have any of the Peru political inner circle considered that the school is going to be still in session for the following months.
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
and possibly part of JUNE (depending upon the number of days school is cancelled)
These comments are hysterical. The school district has been working on these plans for months. They have talked to the city previously. The city chose to get the vote done but the city has nothing to do with ANYTHING related to the demolition of the school. This is purely a very smart financing arrangement planned by the school board. The school district has this all under control and the city council just had a debate on whether or not to vote that night or wait. While that could be debatable this situation is not. Listen to the recording of the meeting. It's all right there and transparent.
Post a Comment