( corrected wording )

questioning the idea of unions.

I question it because I expected that staffers would be treated well, but I see reminders, (down thread) of why... pay parity and ignored sexual harassment... might make such a move necessary. But what is the remedy in these situations? Surely the campaign wouldn't be shut down. What is the bargaining chip?

I ask these questions as someone who comes from a union family and knows how negotiations work to bring around a compromise. But this isn't an open-ended situation as working in other areas, it is a finite situation and there are few remedies available unless we're talking fines or, as I mentioned, the end of the campaign.

The workforce speaks with one voice rather than each inividual dealing with management one on one.

I have read that in the past Bernie has been rough on some people who worked for him and that he was not aware of past sexual harassment.

Maybe it is a way of keeping transparent.

are looking for.

...

Maybe this was part of negotiations following the letter.

But here is my question, and why I raised the matter in the first place...what remedies are available in these situations.

Usually people unionize because working conditions aren't what they should be or at a minimum could be better. Someone could certainly take this action the wrong way.

Add BLU to the growing list of PPRed new and even older members.

For example, they protect workers from unfair treatment and even if Bernie were a saint, not all of his managers will be.

But I do love this.

Our Labor Unions have been taking a pounding for several decades now.

ANYTHING that helps bring them to the front of discussions, even if it’s pointless and more for symbolic purposes is a right good thing in my book.

I still don’t like that he’s running again, period. I do like, admire, and hope this catches on.

are we gonna get picket lines at the end of streets getting canvased?

The staff of Senator Sanders is the one with the best documented need to unionize. I have not heard of any other candidate having to admit they paid women and people of color less than the white men. So I say good for them for refusing to continue being treated that way.

“goals” of this gimmick was to use it to pressure other candidates to “mirror” their “party activists” as if that will make us forget the many documented problems his campaign has had.

other candidates to prove some kind of progressive bona fides and to provide some cover for Bernie’s unreconciled harassment claims. It says as much in all the articles about the motivations behind this. It’s a way to try and beat out other candidates while downplaying Bernie’s campaign problems.

that instead of setting himself out as yet another example that other candidates have to emulate or risk being labeled not as “progressive”. It does seem like a publicity stunt as another poster just noted.

Every campaign has been quickly organized from a very few people to many people running operations in the various primary states and then moving on as the schedule demands.

Many people involved are young - sometimes not even out of college yet. They have followed their passion to be part of getting a candidate nominated and then elected. In many cases, they may be far from home, school and any mentors they had in the past.

A union might act as somewhere - internally - they can speak to someone to deal with problems that have arisen and allow them to be sorted out at a point before it is too late. Consider that going public is really unlikely - because it would hurt the campaign that you are working on and it is very likely the candidate is not the problem.

This is just more “NOT GOOD ENOUGH, BERNIE!”/damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t bullshit from the usual suspects.

to protect themselves from sexual harassment and gender-based pay inequality by "management."

The "re-framing" on this issue is hilarious.