Note: Ballotpedia will be read-only from 9pm CST on February 25-March 9 while Judgepedia is merged into Ballotpedia.
For status updates, visit
Ballotpedia's coverage of elections held on March 3, 2015, was limited. Select races were covered live, and all results will be added once the merger is complete.

Oregon Union Representation Fees Initiative (2010)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Not on Ballot
Proposed allot measures that were not on a ballot
This measure did not or
will not appear on a ballot
Oregon Union Representation Fees Initiative, also known as Initiative 23, did not appear on the November 2, 2010 statewide ballot in Oregon as an initiated state statute. According to the secretary of state, supporters did not file signatures in an attempt to qualify the measure for the 2010 ballot.

Ballot summary

The ballot title read as follows:[1]

Changes public sector unions' obligations, relieves nonmembers of representation costs, unless new election requirements met.

Result of "Yes" Vote: "Yes" vote changes public sector unions' representation obligations, eliminates nonmembers' duty to pay representation costs, unless absolute majority of employees have voted for union representation.

Result of "No" Vote: "No" vote retains existing law: once employees choose union (by election or written authorization procedure), union represents all employees; contract may require sharing representation costs.

Summary: Under current law, employees may choose union representation by majority of votes cast in secret-ballot election or through employer recognition based on written authorizations from majority of employees. Decertification of union requires that 30 percent of employees request election and majority approve decertification. Union must represent both members and nonmember employees. Collective bargaining agreement may require all employees to contribute to representation costs. Measure does not affect private sector unions' representation obligations. Effect on public sector unions' representation obligations is unclear. No collective bargaining agreement may require an employee to contribute to representation costs, unless absolute majority of "subject employees" (undefined) elected union representation within four years before this measure's effective date. Employee's "card check authorization" (undefined) is not a valid vote. Other provisions.

Path to the ballot

See also: Oregon signature requirements

According to the secretary of state, supporters did not file signatures in an attempt to qualify the measure for the 2010 ballot. Initiative petitions for statutes required six percent of 1,379,475, or 82,769 signatures. The deadline for filing signatures for the November 2, 2010 ballot was July 2, 2010.

See also

External links