Samuel Crawford

I would like to register my opposition to this bill using some pro-business and pro-economy positions. Should this bill pass, it will undermine exclusive representation between groups of employees (i.e., unions) and employers. It is tempting to view this as a positive, in that it could be (poorly) argued to empower the individual, but it more severely punishes employers. Saddled with the responsibility of negotiating myriad individual contracts - one for each employee - employers will have no choice but to increase their number of HR staff, attorneys, contract negotiators, etc. This places an undue burden on those employers and is an anti-business outcome, never mind the unfair tax burden on private citizens that these necessary hirings by public employers would cause. This brings me to my next point: public employers - USNH, state departments, the police, etc. - operate using tax funds taken from private citizens. Should this bill pass, the above-mentioned hirings will, by necessity, increase that tax burden. This increase will unfairly impact each and every NH resident and exacerbate an already untenable affordability crisis. In the interest of protecting employer and management rights to negotiate how they choose based on the decreased administrative and economic burden provided by exclusive representation and also on the dire need to minimize tax burdens on the private citizen, I vehemently oppose this bill.