Originally Posted by
Point85ToTheFix
Just a question why is the Gustin amendment bad? Considering a non vote as a "No" makes sense.
That is the way how it works when trying to certify a new union. That's how it is with decertifying unions, and even card drives.
If things aren't even bad enough to get regular folks to tune in and vote then why make a change? A small vocal minority gets to force the broader group to change when they are at least marginally satisfied? Doesn't make sense to me but happy to hear counter arguments.
If you don’t care enough to actually vote then it probably doesn’t matter to you either way, in that case it’s the ones who care enough to vote yes or no who should have the say.