KU pharmacy workers lost a union election by 2 votes. Then dozens of delayed ballots arrived 26%

By Savannah Hawley-Bates0%

6/4/2026, 2:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 33 faulty reasoning types, including Self-Serving Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Anecdotal, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 20.3% saturation with 226 hits. Analysis detected 1,880 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,113 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 37.5% and a BS Rank of 26% (16,402 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 74.90% of the article peer group.

Meagan Bacon was diagnosed with cancer seven years ago. 
She credits the staff at the University of Kansas Health System for saving her life. 
Bacon worked in retail pharmacy at the time, but applied to be a pharmacy technician with the KU Health System in order to help others like her. 
“KU is the only reason I'm still here today,” Bacon said. 
“When I was finally in remission, I applied. 
It's a great place as a patient. 
The staff is very knowledgeable, helpful and understanding. 
I watched people care for me and care for others, and it really inspired me.” 
Bacon has worked for the hospital's specialty pharmacy in Lenexa for a few years now. 
She enjoys the work, but said severe understaffing means that the pharmacy workers must put in long shifts  oftentimes up to 10 hours  and new employees end up leaving quickly because of the workload. 
So Bacon and her coworkers in Lenexa and at the main hospital off W. 39th Street in Kansas City, Kansas, moved to unionize with IAM Healthcare. 
After more than a year of organizing, the Kansas’ Public Employee Relations Board (PERB) set a mail-in election date on May 14 at both offices. 
But the pharmacy technicians lost by just two votes  one at each location. 
Except, after the election, more ballots arrived in the mail  votes that had been postmarked *before* the state’s deadline. 
Bacon and her colleagues have officially contested the results, and demand that PERB count all the valid votes. 
“I want to make this pharmacy as good as I know it can be,” Bacon said. 
“But until we, who are on the floor working, have a say, I don't see that happening.” 
A contested election and missing votes 
Bacon was there on election day when state officials tallied the mail-in votes. 
Bacon said she followed all of PERB’s directions, and even mailed in her ballot a month before election day. 
Still, hers wasn’t on the list of ballots received by the deadline. 
In total, PERB received 37 ballots that were postmarked before the due date but arrived in the mail after May 14. 
Those account for about 40% of the eligible voters. 
“However these people voted really doesn't matter to me,” Bacon said. 
“If they're all no's, they're all no's, but they should still have the right to have their voice heard.” 
The state board is still deliberating whether or not to include the delayed ballots in the final results. 
Pharmacy technician Eric Calovich has worked for the University of Kansas Health System for a decade, mostly at the hospital’s main campus on 39th Street. 
That has oftentimes meant overnight shifts with fewer than 10 employees filling prescriptions for the almost 900 beds in the hospital. 
Calovich’s vote also wasn’t counted, but he and Bacon were among 31 union members who filed a sworn affidavit saying they mailed their ballot well before the deadline. 
“Win, lose, or draw, we should all have our voices heard,” Calovich said. 
“With the 37 votes that have not been counted yet, those people followed the rules and are compliant based on what we were told to do. 
To disenfranchise them for things that are beyond their control is wrong.” 
The University of Kansas Health System said in a statement that it requested an in-person election to avoid irregularities with the mail system, but that PERB decided on a mail-in process. 
Angie Frizzo, a spokesperson for the University of Kansas Health System, said the late ballot arrivals were “unfortunate,” but does not believe any parties are at fault. 
She said the health system will discuss next steps with the union and state board. 
“The health system played no role in the mailing, filling out, or returning of ballots between PERB and the pharmacy technicians,” Frizzo said. 
“The health system does not know when the ballots were sent, who sent them, when they were received, how the individuals voted, or why the ballots were not received by PERB until after the deadline.” 
Mail delays have been a persistent problem around Kansas City. 
A 2024 audit of the postal service in the Kansas City region found that it’s among the slowest in the nation. 
The U.S. 
Postal Service Office of the Inspector General, an independent agency, found that it is largely because of staffing shortages and lack of management oversight. 
The latest in a bumpy road 
The delayed votes “seem to fit the theme,” according to Calovich, who says their more than yearlong union effort was met with serious resistance by the health system. 
Speaking on the KKFI radio program Heartland Labor Forum, pharmacy technicians said that union flyers they posted in allowed areas got taken down within hours, and that the health system used hospital resources to send anti-union messages. 
During the unionizing campaign, the health system hired lawyers from Littler Mendelson, a San Francisco-based firm that makes millions of dollars each year on “union avoidance.” 
(Littler Mendelson also represented Starbucks in its hostile push against baristas’ unionization.) 
The union filed multiple Prohibited Practice charges against KU Health System alleging intimidation, surveillance and misinformation. 
Organizers also allege that hospital management unlawfully terminated a pharmacy technician for exercising their legally-protected rights to discuss unionization in the workplace. 
Frizzo said in a statement that the health system “vigorously defended its actions” against the charges. 
“Contrary to IAM's allegations of prohibited practices, the health system has done nothing wrong,” Frizzo said. 
“We have exercised our responsibility to provide employees with facts and to enforce our policies, including to protect all our employees from solicitation, intimidation, harassment, and retaliation. 
The health system did not terminate any employees for union-related conduct.” 
The technician’s union has asked PERB to count the votes that were delayed in the mail. 
It also started a public petition and appealed to elected officials in Kansas. 
Between filling and dispensing medication, billing, making insurance calls and running medications for thousands of patients, Calovich said he and his coworkers are struggling with understaffing and burnout. 
“It can be exhausting when you get someone trained just for them to leave,” Calovich said. 
“Trying to make sure that our voices are heard, so we can do what we can to provide excellent patient care, that's first and foremost on my mind every day I come in.” 
Calovich is optimistic that the delayed ballots will be included, and said he will be happy with wherever the final results land. 
“But if only half of our votes are counted, I don't think that anyone's going to be able to live with that,” Calovich said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 9.2%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 1.6%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Confirmation Bias9.2%This article: 1.3%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Anchoring Bias1.3%This article: 3.2%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 2.1%Columbia Missourian: 2.7%Availability Heuristic3.2%This article: 3.3%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic3.3%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 1.5%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 2.3%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 7.2%Columbia Missourian: 5.5%Framing Effect2.3%This article: 1.3%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 1.2%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Loss Aversion1.3%This article: 4.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Status Quo Bias4.0%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 6.4%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 7.7%Columbia Missourian: 4.5%Optimism Bias6.4%This article: 2.2%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 1.1%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%Pessimism Bias2.2%This article: 20.3%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 6.9%Columbia Missourian: 5.4%Negativity Bias20.3%This article: 20.3%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 3.1%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias20.3%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 4.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 1.6%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%In-Group Bias4.0%This article: 2.4%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias2.4%This article: 5.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 1.7%Columbia Missourian: 2.4%Halo Effect5.0%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.5%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Recency Bias0.5%This article: 0.5%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.5%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.2%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 2.7%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Appeal to Authority7.2%This article: 5.4%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 1.2%Columbia Missourian: 1.1%False Dilemma5.4%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 3.0%Columbia Missourian: 3.6%Hasty Generalization6.0%This article: 2.3%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Red Herring2.3%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 2.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 12.1%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 5.6%Columbia Missourian: 5.2%Appeal to Emotion12.1%This article: 1.4%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Begging the Question1.4%This article: 7.5%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 2.1%Columbia Missourian: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)7.5%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 4.9%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Burden of Proof4.9%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 10.6%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 1.8%Columbia Missourian: 2.6%Anecdotal10.6%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 3.4%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.4%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 2.4%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Special Pleading2.4%This article: 1.1%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy1.1%This article: 9.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Unattributed Quote9.0%This article: 0.5%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.5%This article: 2.1%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 1.8%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Biased Writer Voice2.1%This article: 3.2%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Indoctrination3.2%This article: 3.4%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias3.4%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Savannah Hawley-Bates: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

1113 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers51%attributed speech550writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageMeagan Bacon • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageMeagan Bacon • 11 words • 0.0% coverageMeagan Bacon • 8 words • 0.0% coverageMeagan Bacon • 7 words • 0.0% coverageMeagan Bacon • 8 words • 100.0% coverageMeagan Bacon • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageMeagan Bacon • 36 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageMeagan Bacon • 16 words • 0.0% coverageMeagan Bacon • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageMeagan Bacon • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageMeagan Bacon • 11 words • 100.0% coverageMeagan Bacon • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageEric Calovich • 13 words • 0.0% coverageEric Calovich • 26 words • 0.0% coverageEric Calovich • 12 words • 0.0% coverageUniversity of Kansas Health System • 31 words • 0.0% coverageAngie Frizzo • 27 words • 0.0% coverageAngie Frizzo • 15 words • 0.0% coverageAngie Frizzo • 23 words • 0.0% coverageAngie Frizzo • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageEric Calovich • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageAngie Frizzo • 16 words • 0.0% coverageAngie Frizzo • 16 words • 0.0% coverageAngie Frizzo • 27 words • 0.0% coverageAngie Frizzo • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageEric Calovich • 28 words • 0.0% coverageEric Calovich • 16 words • 0.0% coverageEric Calovich • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageEric Calovich • 24 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Eric Calovich

100%flagged-word coverage
180 attributed words32% of attributed speech60% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Politically Left Leaning B-6.9 ptsWriter: 6.9%Eric Calovich: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-6.7 ptsWriter: 6.7%Eric Calovich: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-2.2 ptsWriter: 2.2%Eric Calovich: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-1.1 ptsWriter: 1.1%Eric Calovich: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.