Currently, police unions are allowed to collectively bargain with government officials over the methods used to hold police officers accountable for misconduct. Proponents argue that collective bargaining stands in the way of accountability. Opponents of limiting collective bargaining argue that more intense criticism of police will disincentivize officers from doing their jobs resulting in crime rates going up.
Statistics are shown for this demographic
Response rates from 183 State Senate District 26 voters.
75% Yes |
25% No |
66% Yes |
25% No |
6% Yes, and eliminate collective bargaining for police unions |
|
3% Yes, and abolish police unions |
Trend of support over time for each answer from 183 State Senate District 26 voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 183 State Senate District 26 voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from State Senate District 26 voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
@8PFKXVS4yrs4Y
Yes, and abolish the police.
@8PFNWFN4yrs4Y
Yes; each side must be heard as much as the other, both having similar or equal power in the court.
@8PFPGTC4yrs4Y
Renegotiate contracts to give higher salaries and more benefits but less immunity from prosecution and stricter training and discipline.
@96DPFJ32yrs2Y
@85SVNQV4yrs4Y
Yes, and abolish police unions
@8PPWQJ84yrs4Y
I don't understand this question.
@8YFBRCG3yrs3Y
Yes, and abolish all public unions
Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Collective Bargaining” news articles, updated frequently.
Join in on the most popular conversations.