HB1704

Strongly oppose! This is why we have unions: to have fair and equitable negotiations for ALL members.

When workers can bargain to protect their wages and benefits, they’re able to sustain affordability while life becomes unaffordable for others around them. I see that happening in our town for our teachers, and it’s a good thing. They can afford to buy houses in our town and have a secure life while they teach our kids. All workers should have this. Teachers aren’t making life unaffordable for everyone else, our unsustainable tax structure, lack of workers rights, and wild inequality is the problem.

Time and time again, NH has opposed the Right to Work (FOR LESS) legislation that keeps being repackaged and represented, There are so many bigger problems in our state right now- affordable housing, affordable childcare, continuing to give tax breaks to those who need it the least while the working class pays the bill. Vote this down and get to work for the working people in NH who need real change and not grandstanding by people who do not have our best interests at heart.

Do not weaken workers’ rights and collective bargaining. In education when workers’ rights are not part of a collective bargaining agreement, working conditions decline, and students will suffer.

I am in opposition of this bill and denounce any bill that would jeopardize collective bargaining in the state of NH.

I stand opposed to any bill that hides behind the facade of right to work which bypasses unions that represent the workers.

This Bill if passed will lower the already financially strapped blue collar workers of NH .

Our economy and our well-being depend on the well-being of our workers.! It is designed to build a wedge between workers in a time when we need cooperation and supportiveness between us. We have enough division!!! PLEASE vote NO on this bill!

supporting this bill will cause irreparable economic damage to this state and then collapse of this country as other states follow suit . just listen to Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger.

This bill will serve to weaken our unions and therefore weaken our public schools. Strong unions help negotiate fair wages, benefits, and working conditions for some of the most valued members of our communities. They are a foundation of our country.

Dear Members of the House Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitative Services Committee, I write in strong opposition to HB 1704-FN, misleadingly titled the “Public Employee Choice Act.” Despite its rhetoric of freedom and choice, this bill would fundamentally undermine New Hampshire’s public-sector labor relations system, destabilize workplaces, weaken employee protections, and expose public employers to serious legal, operational, and fiscal risks. At its core, HB 1704 is not about expanding rights—it is about dismantling collective bargaining by fragmenting it. For more than 50 years, RSA 273-A has provided a balanced framework that protects employee voice, ensures labor peace, and gives public employers a single, orderly mechanism for negotiating wages, hours, and working conditions. HB 1704 blows a hole in that framework by authorizing individualized bargaining within an otherwise collectively represented bargaining unit, while still retaining an “exclusive representative” in name only. This contradiction is not theoretical—it is structural and dangerous. First, individual bargaining inside a collective system is unworkable. Public employers would be forced to negotiate simultaneously with unions and with individual employees over overlapping subjects, creating inconsistent terms, internal inequities, and constant disputes. This bill invites chaos, not clarity. It all but guarantees grievances, unfair labor practice complaints, and litigation—hardly a recipe for efficient or accountable government. Second, HB 1704 undermines the duty of fair representation while still pretending to preserve exclusive representation. Unions would remain legally responsible for representing entire bargaining units but would be prohibited from negotiating on behalf of employees who opt out—even when the outcomes of those individual negotiations directly affect the unit as a whole. That is not “choice”; it is an intentional weakening of worker protections through statutory contradiction. Third, the bill creates coercive pressure disguised as freedom. Individual employees—especially lower-paid workers—will be placed in inherently unequal bargaining positions against government employers with vastly superior leverage, legal resources, and institutional power. Collective bargaining exists precisely because individual bargaining in the public sector has historically failed to protect workers from retaliation, favoritism, and inequity. Fourth, the criminal penalties in this bill are extreme and unprecedented. HB 1704 makes violations a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by jail time, fines, and Attorney General prosecution. It criminalizes long-standing labor practices and opens the door to selective enforcement and political interference in workplace relations. Labor policy should promote stability and fairness—not threaten workers, union officers, or public officials with incarceration. Fifth, the bill’s sweeping prohibitions on picketing, boycotts, and advocacy raise serious constitutional concerns, particularly under the First Amendment. The vague and expansive language invites legal challenge and exposes the state to costly litigation—expenses that will ultimately be borne by taxpayers. Finally, the exemptions carved out for police, firefighters, corrections officers, and certain federally protected employees reveal the bill’s internal inconsistency. The sponsors implicitly acknowledge that exclusive representation is essential for safety-sensitive and federally regulated roles—yet deny that same logic to teachers, municipal workers, nurses, and other public servants who also provide essential services. In short, HB 1704 is a solution in search of a problem. New Hampshire already protects the right of employees not to join a union, while preserving a proven system that promotes fairness, predictability, and labor peace. This bill would replace that system with fragmentation, inequity, and legal instability. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the committee to find HB 1704-FN inexpedient to legislate. Thank you for your careful consideration. Sincerely, David John Preece New Hampshire State Representative Hillsborough District 17

I am a firefighter in the State of New Hampshire and a proud member of my local firefighters’ union. I am here today to respectfully oppose this bill, which would allow individual employees to bypass their union and bargain separately with municipalities. Collective bargaining exists for a reason. Firefighters, police officers, and other municipal employees perform inherently dangerous work, often under extreme conditions, and rely on clear, consistent labor agreements to ensure fair wages, safe staffing levels, appropriate training, and reliable benefits. Allowing individual bargaining undermines this structure and weakens the ability of employees to advocate for safety, not just for themselves, but for the communities they serve. This bill would create inconsistent employment standards within the same department, foster internal division, and place municipalities in the difficult position of negotiating multiple individual agreements instead of one comprehensive contract. That is inefficient, costly, and ultimately destabilizing for local governments already managing tight budgets. More importantly, this bill weakens the collective voice of workers. Firefighters do not bargain collectively out of convenience, we do so because a unified voice helps balance the inherent power imbalance between individual employees and municipal employers. Individual bargaining exposes workers to pressure and retaliation, whether intentional or not, and erodes workplace protections that have been built over decades. Public safety should not be subject to a race to the bottom. Strong unions help ensure experienced personnel stay in the profession, departments remain adequately staffed, and safety standards are maintained. Weakening collective bargaining threatens recruitment, retention, and morale at a time when fire departments across the state are already facing staffing challenges. New Hampshire municipalities already have the ability to manage labor costs through the existing collective bargaining process. This bill does not solve a real problem—it creates new ones. I urge the committee to oppose this bill and to continue supporting the collective bargaining framework that has served New Hampshire’s workers, municipalities, and residents well.

I oppose this bill. Our firefighters put their lives on their life for every shift and it is immoral and disgusting that the State would target this group under the guise of "busting unions." They deserve our support. Any legislature supporting forgets 9/11 "We will never forget"

To the House Labor Committee: I urge you to defeat HB 1704.This bill would permit public sector workers who are covered by a union contract to “opt out” of the contract and negotiate their own deal with management. First, have ANY workers covered by a collective bargaining agreement asked for this? Second, have you spoken to public employers about the difficulty of bargaining with a union and then possibly having to bargain AGAIN with individual workers ( and how likely they are to give individual workers anything more than what the union has bargained for)? Third, workers who are part of a union can: A. Organize their fellow workers to reject a contract they don’t like. B. Run for union office if they don’t like their leadership. C. Join the union bargaining team. There are many ways for individuals covered by a contract to have an impact on the outcome of bargaining. HB 1704 is offering an unworkable solution to a “problem” that can be solved through participation-a problem, that as far as I can tell, does not exist. Jan Schaffer Warner

This bill's intent undermines worker solidarity and, rather than benefiting wage earners, pits them against one another. Devide and conquer is an aged old tactic designed to weaken labor unity.

My name is Cylan Gosselin. I am a resident of Lempster, New Hampshire, a professional firefighter/paramedic, and a proud member of the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF). I respectfully submit this testimony in opposition to HB1704. As a public safety professional, collective bargaining is not simply about wages or benefits, it is fundamentally about safety, staffing standards, training requirements, working conditions, and the ability for first responders to advocate for the resources necessary to protect both ourselves and the communities we serve. The strength of these protections depends on unified representation through our union. HB1704 would allow public employees to bargain individually with employers outside of the collective bargaining framework. While this may appear to increase flexibility, in practice it weakens the collective voice that ensures fair, consistent, and safe working conditions for all public employees. Fragmenting representation undermines solidarity, creates inequity within departments, and shifts bargaining power heavily toward employers rather than workers. In emergency services, this has real world consequences. Decisions about staffing levels, shift schedules, safety equipment, health protections, and training standards directly impact patient outcomes and firefighter safety. These are not issues that should be negotiated individually. They require consistent, department wide standards developed through collective bargaining to maintain operational readiness and public safety. Allowing individual bargaining risks creating disparities, favoritism, and pressure on employees to negotiate alone without adequate leverage or protection. This can erode morale, weaken workforce stability, and ultimately compromise the quality of service provided to the public. For these reasons, and in the interest of protecting both public employees and the citizens we serve, I respectfully urge the committee to vote Inexpedient to Legislate on HB1704. Thank you for your time and consideration. Cylan Gosselin

This bill was created by out of state interests for the sole purpose of weakening and destroying labor unions. Repercussions of this legislation would contribute significantly to workplace instability, economic disparity, and workplace safety issues. I strongly oppose this bill and urge you to do the same.

HB 1704 eviscerates the very notion of collective bargaining, is designed to drive a wedge between and among workers, and invites disruptive, costly-to-manage HR chaos. THIS BILL MUST BE DEFEATED!

This Bill completely undermines Unions and the workers’ ability to work in solidarity toward fixing issues involving terms and conditions of employment in their own workplace.

Collective Bargaining has been successful since I began employment with the State in 1996. This bill is nothing more than a veiled attempt to dismantle the Collective Bargaining process by folks who have never been involved in the process.

Collective bargaining is a good thing for employees. Why are you trying to take it away and make things worse for them?

this tax is offensive on all fronts

Just stop sending bills like this to the floor. You're undermining Firefighters, EMTs, Paramedics, Law Enforcement and a host of other services that you absolutely rely on. The best way to show that you do not value these men and women is to bring a bill like this to the floor. Do not thank them for their service and undermine them like this. Unless you want to be like Judas. Start working on restoring New Hampshires retirement system, fight with us for better health insurance and benefits. But first, vote no on this bill.

I oppose this bill, as it anti-union, and unions protect workers rights.