Florida Governor Ron DeSantis backs a new bill targeting unions; those who support him won't be affected
In 2023, the Florida Legislature passed Senate Bill 256, a measure designed to attack public sector unions by making it harder for them to collect dues, while simultaneously forcing them to show that at least 60% of their members were paying their dues. Any union that failed to meet that 60% threshold faced a decertification vote.
The measure was pushed by the Freedom Foundation, a right-wing think tank funded by billionaires. In fact, in an interview with CBS Miami in 2023, the southern director for the Freedom Foundation, Rusty Brown, took credit for writing the bill.
The Freedom Foundation has never been shy about what its real intention is – which is to eliminate public sector unions. On their website – under a banner that reads "Why We Fight" – they argue that "government unions are a root cause of every growing national dysfunction in America."
Following the passage of SB256, the Freedom Foundation went after the state's largest teachers union, the United Teachers of Dade, and financed a multi-million-dollar campaign to decertify the union and replace it with one that would be more friendly to their interests.
That campaign failed, and the teachers in Miami-Dade voted to keep their union, with 83% voting for UTD, 14% voting for the Freedom Foundation-backed alternative, and 3% voting to have no union at all.
In the three years since SB 256 passed, there have been 209 decertification votes against teacher unions across the state, and in all 209 cases, the teachers voted overwhelmingly to keep their union.
And yet, while the campaign failed to decertify any of the teacher unions in Florida, SB 256 was able to eliminate many municipal and county unions that had represented hundreds of thousands of workers. Those workers now have no one to negotiate their salaries and benefits or represent them in grievances against their employers.
Teacher unions targeted in new bill
But the clear goal of the Freedom Foundation and Governor Ron DeSantis was to wipe out the teacher unions. And so, after losing 209 union elections, the Freedom Foundation and DeSantis are pushing a new bill – Senate Bill 1296 – through the legislature this year. And this bill rewrites the rules for those union elections.
Under this bill, the union doesn't just have to win with a majority of the people who decide to vote – they would now be required to have a majority of every employee in the collective bargaining unit.
CBS Miami could not find this same rule anywhere else in the country.
To understand the significance of this change, imagine if it were applied to all elections. A candidate wouldn't have to just get a majority of the people who vote; they would have to get a majority of everyone registered to vote.
For instance, in 2022, Ron DeSantis celebrated what he called was an historic 19-point victory over Charlie Crist, winning almost 60% of the people who voted.
But applying the proposed standard to DeSantis's election, he only received 4.6 million of the 14.5 million registered voters. This means he only received 32% of all registered voters.
Under the proposed standard, DeSantis would have lost, and no one would be in the governor's mansion to represent the needs of the people of Florida.
The Freedom Foundation consulted and helped draft this latest bill, which is reportedly the governor's number one priority for this legislative session.
Senate Bill 1296 is being carried by Senator Jonathan Martin, a Republican from Lee County. During a recent committee hearing, Martin had trouble answering basic questions about the bill or its impact. He also made it clear he did not discuss the bill with any labor leaders or union officials to try to address the concerns the bill allegedly tries to address.
Democratic Senator Tina Polsky noted one reason why every teacher doesn't vote is that sometimes the elections are held during the summer, when teachers might be away. In response, Martin appeared to accuse those teacher unions of doing it deliberately.
"I kind of know where teachers are during the school year; they are in school," Martin said. "So, if they want more turnout, why would they do the election in the summertime, unless of course the people in charge of the unions don't want the input and they want to keep their friends in power and they want to keep pushing their agenda while they pretend to speak for the majority of schoolteachers."
Polsky responded, "It's pretty clear you have a bias against the union leadership, which I don't appreciate."
And in fact, Martin was wrong. The unions do not set the dates for the elections. The dates are set by the state's Public Employees Relations Commission (PERC), which is made up of individuals appointed by DeSantis.
Polsky then asked Martin, "Do you know what percentage of the electorate voted for you in the last election? Not the percentage that you won by, but the percent of the people registered to vote?"
Before Martin could answer, the Republican chair of the committee interrupted him and said, "You don't have to answer the question."
CBS News Miami reviewed the results of Martin's last election, and he, in fact, did receive less than 50% of the registered voters in his district in 2024.
Martin did not respond to a request for an interview for this story.
How does this bill impact voters?
While the bill now requires a new, unprecedented standard for unions to win elections in the future, it also makes it harder for individuals to vote.
Until now, employees would receive a ballot in the mail from PERC that would include a self-addressed envelope with pre-paid postage.
Under the Florida Administrative Code, the cost of postage was paid by the union. But under this new senate bill, PERC is no longer permitted to include an envelope with pre-paid postage, meaning if a worker wants to mail their ballot, they have to provide their own stamp – an annoyance that is likely to limit the number of returned ballots. (And under the proposed law, anyone whose vote isn't returned is automatically considered a vote against the union in their effort to get to 50%.)
Another aspect of the bill that is raising concerns of political bias is that it does not apply to the unions representing first responders, primarily police and fire unions – two groups who supported DeSantis in his previous elections and have a long history of supporting Republican candidates, including those in the legislature today.
And the ones now being targeted tend to support Democrats.
Last month, dozens of public sector workers – teachers, nurses, bus drivers, utility workers – testified about how this bill would hurt them.
One worker said, "I'm asking you, please do not vote for this bill, it hurts those who work hard."
Another added, "It's hard to pay for groceries. It's tough these days."
"Not all people affected by this are teachers," another worker added. "I'm a utility worker for my entire career. I may not be considered a first responder, but when your water goes out, I'm the one you call to get it back on. And this affects my whole family."
While most people spoke against the bill, some were in favor – including Brown from the Freedom Foundation. Following the hearing, CBS News Miami spoke to Brown about the intentions of this bill.
Here's a transcript of that interview:
Rusty Brown:
First of all, if they have over 60% membership, they're not even subject to the elections process, which a lot of unions do.
Jim DeFede:
But you made it harder to get to that 60% threshold of union dues-paying members in the last bill by making it harder for them to contribute their dues. You took away the ability to do automatic [payroll] deduction. And so now each individual has to figure out [how to pay their dues] through Venmo or writing a check each month. So, you made it harder at the same time you raised that standard from 50 to 60%. You see what I'm saying. It seems like a very deliberate part on you and certain legislators to make unions virtually impossible to exist.
Rusty Brown:
I don't think that's a fair characterization. And I think when you compare it to other elections, you have to look at what a union does. They are the sole bargaining agent for a group of employees. That group of employees could be tens, hundreds, thousands, or five. It doesn't matter. And when they're the sole voice, it should be a high threshold. It should be the highest possible threshold that it could be to make sure that they really, truly represent the voice of the people that they represent. When you try to compare that to a legislator, you're talking about one voice in a legislative body of, you know, in the case of Congress, you've got many, many hundreds, and in the cases of Florida, you got many dozens. And no legislator has anywhere near the power over somebody's day-to-day life that a union does that's bargaining on your behalf.
Jim DeFede:
Well, let's just take the governor, for instance. Using your standard that to be legitimate, you should be able to get 50% of those who are registered with the union. If you look at that, in 2022, there were 14.5 million registered voters. Ron DeSantis received 4.6 million votes. That means he only got 32 percent of registered voters. By your logic, Ron De Santis wouldn't be a legitimate leader of the state of Florida.
Rusty Brown:
If he were subject to the same rules as what would be on unions. But I think the comparison is not fair. I think that a union that has a direct influence over somebody's livelihood, over the working conditions that you go to every day…
Jim DeFede:
You don't think the governor has a direct impact on people's livelihoods and the conditions that they go to work every day? He appoints the PERC Board, gets them ratified. I mean, clearly the governor has extensive authority and power, and yet you don't apply the same standard to him. Donald Trump, for that matter, received six million votes in 2024 out of 14 million registered voters. By your standard, he wasn't really legitimately winning the state of Florida.
Rusty Brown:
I disagree with the comparison of political candidates, regardless of the office, as a union that is the sole and only, the sole only bargaining representative. I mean, when you're in a union and you, when your represented by a union, you don't even have the right to go speak for yourself. You know, I mean if you think you're doing a better job, you cannot go down to your boss and say, hey, I deserve a raise. Like, oh, sorry, we have a salary schedule. The union bargains for that.
Jim DeFede:
I'm trying to understand what is the ultimate goal here because I heard Senator Martin talk about this as well during the committee hearing recently. Do you think that the best scenario would be for each individual teacher, for instance, or each individual nurse at a hospital – because this affects not just teachers, we talk a lot about teachers, but it affects nurses and school bus drivers and sanitation workers, any city or county employee who's represented by a union. Do you want each of them to individually go to the city or county manager or the superintendent of the school district and negotiate individual salaries and benefits?
Rusty Brown:
So that's a complicated answer to that. So, number one, all you, all that this bill would do is make unions accountable to their members. Like, do what your members ask. Do the best that you can for them, and you should have no problem showing the support. Now, you step outside of that, you say it like it's an unrealistic possibility. There are several states around the country, including my home state of Texas, that don't have collective bargaining rights for public employees. And yet, we have teachers.
Jim DeFede:
Is that really the goal here in Florida, to get to a point where public employees don't really have collective bargaining rights?
Rusty Brown:
No, I've never said that.
Jim DeFede:
But you were talking about how you have that in Texas, you have it in other states, it seems that that's the goal here, even though Florida's constitution allows for the ability for collective bargaining.
Rusty Brown:
It allows you to have the right for collective bargaining, but at the same time, the way that exclusive representation is added into that equation, it also forces people to be subject to collective bargaining. It's a two-way street.
Jim DeFede:
Well, except in Florida, which is a right-to-work state, nobody is required to pay dues to the union. It's a right to work state, which means you can get all the benefits of having the union represent you, negotiate your salary, negotiate your benefits. And you seem to suggest that the benefits and salaries would be better without the union, I'm not sure there's any evidence of that, but nobody has to pay into the union that doesn't want to.
Rusty Brown:
Absolutely correct, but membership and representation are not the same thing. You can be a teacher or a sanitation worker, nurse, whatever the case may be, and you cannot want to be part of the union, but yet the union still bargains for you, even if you don't like it. And so why shouldn't the majority of employees in a bargaining unit have to show support and prove support for what the union is doing. I mean, I would argue that that's the most important function of the union.
Brown asks the question what if a teacher or a nurse or a sanitation worker doesn't like the contract and benefits the union negotiates on their behalf? He makes it seem the employee is stuck. But what he fails to remember, is that any contract the union negotiates still must be voted on and ratified by all the workers – including those who do not pay union dues.
Last year, for instance, the contract negotiated by the teacher's union in Miami Dade was approved with a vote of 83 percent.
And so, it is not accurate to say, non-union members don't have a voice or an opportunity to vote on what the union does.
The interview with Brown concluded with a discussion on why police and fire unions are exempted from the new union election rules.
Jim DeFede:
If this is such a good idea, why doesn't it apply to first responders? Why doesn't apply to the unions that represent police officers and firefighters and correction officers.
Rusty Brown:
So as far as the carve out for public safety, look, that's a decision that was made through the political process. That's not something that we advocate for or against. I have no stance on that whatsoever.
Jim DeFede:
So, you think it's political?
Rusty Brown:
I can tell you that it matches the statute in a variety of different areas. I mean, there's all kinds of different carve outs for public safety throughout Florida law. And this is just another example of it.
Jim DeFede:
Do you think it could have anything to do with the fact that those unions – police, fire, corrections – all endorsed and supported the governor, Ron DeSantis?
Rusty Brown:
Ron DeSantis is not the only vote in the legislature, and this is how they decided they wanted to introduce the bill.
Jim DeFede:
It's his administration that's pushing this bill.
Rusty Brown:
Yes, but it has to make it through the House, the Senate and three committees stop on each side. And, you know, it's been supported every time it's being heard. So just to say that it's Ron DeSantis that decided, I think, would be a misrepresentation of the bill and the support that is there for these measures.
Jim DeFede:
Tell me honestly, Rusty, you think Floridians would be better off if there were no unions representing public sector workers?
Rusty Brown:
I think the unions that will survive this process will be the ones that best represent the people that they represent.
Jim DeFede:
Who do you think those are? Can you cite me one of those unions?
Rusty Brown:
No. That's not for me to decide, I'm not a Florida public employee.
Jim DeFede:
Other than the first responders, do you think any other union survives this bill?
Rusty Brown:
Absolutely. I mean, there's a number of unions that have maintained over 60%. And as long as they continue to maintain over 60%, they won't be subject to these new election requirements.
Jim DeFede:
I'll wrap up with this. You believe that nurses, sanitation workers, bus drivers, and teachers would do better without a union than with one.
Rusty Brown:
I would say that slightly differently. I would say if they have a union that doesn't have their support, then they feel they would do better without one.