Question 1Constitutional amendment · Put on the ballot by lawmakers
State Worker Contracts in Budget
Explain it like I'm 5
State workers and the state make deals about pay, hours, and benefits. This would make the governor put money for those deals in the budget, including deals decided by a neutral referee.
Yes vote
The governor must include funding for state employee bargaining agreements and neutral arbitration decisions in the proposed budget, and related arbitration changes take effect.
No vote
Current budget and collective bargaining rules remain in place.
The question to ask yourself
Should worker agreements receive stronger budget protection, even when the state has competing needs?
The case for
- Makes state commitments to workers part of the proposed budget.
- Provides a neutral process for resolving bargaining deadlocks.
- Could help the state recruit and retain employees.
Backed by: AFSCME Maryland, Maryland State and District of Columbia AFL-CIO, SEIU Local 500, American Federation of Teachers Maryland, Maryland State Education Association, IBEW Local 26, State Law Enforcement Officers Labor Alliance
The case against
- Could limit budget flexibility during shortfalls or emergencies.
- An unelected arbitrator could influence taxpayer-funded pay and benefits.
- Required funding could compete with other public priorities.
Opposed by: No organized opposition found
- Money
- Costs are not estimated in the sources provided; actual spending would depend on future agreements and arbitration decisions.
- Don't be misled
- A yes vote would not guarantee every union demand, because agreements or arbitration would still determine the terms and the legislature would pass the final budget.