Read closer, and this is almost as much about a divide within organized labor as it is a divide between some elements of organized labor and environmentalists. These divisions will become obvious when we find out where the Trump votes are and where the Hillary votes are from the organized labor space.
Also, I think this has helped me figure something out:
Trade union leaders may remain wary of some GOP candidates because they support causes like right-to-work laws that unions traditionally oppose. But right-to-work, which allows workers to opt out of union dues and fees, doesn’t smother jobs; research shows that it often boosts investment and hiring.
I’ve been writing it myself here, because RTW/PP is actually a frequent feature of my professional existence, that whether or not a state is RTW or not doesn’t make a difference on actual real world conditions, that those are determined by many factors more important than RTW-or-not. It’s just that since union leaders think it’s a BFD, they’ll make the union rank and file think it’s an absolutely existential issue, and in Missouri statewide politics, union rank-and-file households are the crucial marginal swing constituency, so there won’t be a Republican Governor ever as long as s/he supports RTW and the General Assembly remains in Republican hands. My suggestion for Hanaway, Kindercare, Brunner, is that one of them breaks ranks on RTW.
However, what this tells me, from the article, is that union leadership is using RTW-PP as a LOOK SQUIRREL diversion to paper over not only the internal blue team politics between the blues and the greens, but also the schism within organized labor between Trump-leaning construction and trades unions and Hillary-leaning public and service employees unions.