Brokenwrench and Bababooy, let's compare apples to apples here. A union representation vote is the same as a referendum question on an election ballot. Both are yes or no questions. Let's say your city's school district has a referendum on the ballot that asks if the district should spend $10 million to build a new high school. You have two choices: a yes vote or a no vote. A yes vote says, "Yes, I want to spend the money on the new school." A no vote, says "No, I don't want the money spent on a new school." It's quite simple. If you fail to cast a ballot, no one at your polling place fills out a ballot on your behalf, marks "no" on the referendum question, and puts it in the tabulator, do they? Of course not. That would be illegal. The results are based solely on votes cast. If more people vote yes than no, you get a new school. If you vote yes, you aren't saying, "I want a new school for the next five years and then want it torn down." You are voting on a new school, plain and simple. Now let's compare that example of American democracy with the flawed rules that apply only to airline and railway workers. The union representation vote is a binding referendum just as the school referendum is. A yes vote says, "Yes, I want the union to represent me." A no vote says, "No, I don't want union representation." The difference is that if you don't bother to vote one way or the other (abstain), someone stuffs the ballot box, therefore making it a biased election. Someone is essentially marking a no vote on a ballot on your behalf and putting it in the tabulator. Someone else is assuming how you might have voted had you cast a ballot. Your reference to term limits has no bearing here. A union representation vote is a binding referendum, not an election for an office. Union officers have set durations of their terms just as any elected official in government does.