Governor Phil Scott has vetoed a bill aimed at modifying union regulations in Vermont, marking his fourth veto of the 2025 legislative session. The decision comes a week before lawmakers reconvene in Montpelier for a veto session to address an education reform bill.The vetoed legislation proposed two significant changes. First, it would have allowed judicial employees to vote on joining the Vermont State Employees’ Association (VSEA).“It was about giving supervisors in the judiciary the right to vote on whether they wanted to have a union, similar to the supervisory unit we have in the executive branch that’s been there for 50 years,” said Steve Howard, of the VSEA. Scott cited in his veto letter that the judiciary did not ask for this, and the judiciary’s existing backlog and operational challenges as reasons to oppose the bill, emphasizing the need to improve system efficiencies instead of introducing divisive measures.“This would create divisiveness and fear at a time when our court system is managing a significant backlog,” Scott said.The second component of the bill sought to increase the required union member petition threshold from 30% to 50% plus one member for voting on decertification, making it harder for employees to leave a union. As it stands, it takes 30% of employees to petition to enter or leave a union. Proponents of the bill argued that this change would prevent a small minority from disrupting union stability.“It’s to allow the majority of the bargaining unit to have the full function of their union and not allow a small minority to be constantly triggering elections,” Howard said. Critics, however, likened it to an uneven playing field, suggesting it would unfairly benefit existing unions.“I liken it to football with the New England Patriots,” said Rep. Jim Harrison, R-Chittenden. “You’re playing the Buffalo Bills, and it’s OK for the Bills to win with 30 points, but yet the Patriots would need 51 points to win. I mean, that’s just not right if you’re the Patriots, so why should it be the same here?” Harrison said. Governor Scott said in the veto letter he supports collective bargaining, but that “this bill seeks to bolster existing unions by significantly increasing the voting threshold for decertification. This makes it more difficult for employees who feel poorly represented to consider their alternatives.”The bill passed in the House without a veto-proof majority, leaving its future uncertain ahead of next week’s veto session.
Governor Phil Scott has vetoed a bill aimed at modifying union regulations in Vermont, marking his fourth veto of the 2025 legislative session. The decision comes a week before lawmakers reconvene in Montpelier for a veto session to address an education reform bill.
The vetoed legislation proposed two significant changes.
Advertisement
First, it would have allowed judicial employees to vote on joining the Vermont State Employees’ Association (VSEA).
“It was about giving supervisors in the judiciary the right to vote on whether they wanted to have a union, similar to the supervisory unit we have in the executive branch that’s been there for 50 years,” said Steve Howard, of the VSEA.
Scott cited in his veto letter that the judiciary did not ask for this, and the judiciary’s existing backlog and operational challenges as reasons to oppose the bill, emphasizing the need to improve system efficiencies instead of introducing divisive measures.
“This would create divisiveness and fear at a time when our court system is managing a significant backlog,” Scott said.
The second component of the bill sought to increase the required union member petition threshold from 30% to 50% plus one member for voting on decertification, making it harder for employees to leave a union.
As it stands, it takes 30% of employees to petition to enter or leave a union.
Proponents of the bill argued that this change would prevent a small minority from disrupting union stability.
“It’s to allow the majority of the bargaining unit to have the full function of their union and not allow a small minority to be constantly triggering elections,” Howard said.
Critics, however, likened it to an uneven playing field, suggesting it would unfairly benefit existing unions.
“I liken it to football with the New England Patriots,” said Rep. Jim Harrison, R-Chittenden. “You’re playing the Buffalo Bills, and it’s OK for the Bills to win with 30 points, but yet the Patriots would need 51 points to win. I mean, that’s just not right if you’re the Patriots, so why should it be the same here?” Harrison said.
Governor Scott said in the veto letter he supports collective bargaining, but that “this bill seeks to bolster existing unions by significantly increasing the voting threshold for decertification. This makes it more difficult for employees who feel poorly represented to consider their alternatives.”
The bill passed in the House without a veto-proof majority, leaving its future uncertain ahead of next week’s veto session.
