I'm retired, but I did work in education for over 30 years and I constantly heard from teachers and other unionized workers who frequently complained about union officials lavish spending, their support for fellow teachers and others who were incompetent and a disgrace to their profession, and union support, with member dues, of political parties that they did not support and/or political issues/activities outside of their own jurisdiction and sometimes outside of their own country.
If you agree that the average voter is sick and tired of the corruption and cronyism in political parties, the average unionized worker is equally sick and tired of the same thing in union leadership.
i tend to doubt that these union busting bills will be ultimately be thrown out in court. ****, the whole country would currently be "right to work"roll had Scalia not passed away unexpectedly. it sucks, but that's how i see it. workers are going to have to not only unionize, but also start voting in their own best interest. our idiotic two party teamsport system makes that damned difficult, though.
Then do something about union corruption, not union. The thing is, if you try doing it alone, you won't get anywhere. If you surround yourself with equally disgruntled workers and go after them (form a union with a common goal), it may just be possible to get that changed.
See how that works?
To me, that sounds suspiciously like some guy coming into a mom and pop store and telling pop that, since the guy is out on the street and stopping thugs from coming in and robbing the store, pop owes the guy money...whether pop asked the guy for this "protection" or not.
There's a word for that, isn't there??? Extortion??
The solution is that the union negotiates salaries and benefits for its members...not for any other employee who does not agree to become a member. Then the union wouldn't be engaging in extortion.
Pure nonesense, first of all Unions are voted in by the employees initially and by majority all the while the company that wants to pay peanuts threatens and coerces everyone they can not to vote for the union because then the employees must be paid a fair wage <gasp> so you little scenario is nonesense.
Far right conservative Koch bros babies like Scott Walker have one goal to pay employees as little as possible to enable them to take more. For Scott Walker it was koch pac donations to fund his presidential aspirations.
Right to work is CODE for RIGHT TO WORK FOR NOTHING
That is fine, but if they opt out (and many do), they should work at different pay and benefits than those who are union. Goes both ways.
That's a pretty harsh and revisionist view of the history of unionization. Now I'll admit that like many movements to do social good, after they succeed they can become warped and twisted by power politics. Unions are no exception.
Still, their development came from the very real abuses of robber baron businessmen who thought only of the bottom line and considered workers easily replaceable parts in their money making machines. That mentality has not changed, it has become worse with the evolution of impersonal corporations.
Union value and importance has lessened in the eyes of average citizens for two reasons.
1. It is no longer a sellers market. Despite all this constant hype we hear about employment improvement, that's all it is...hype! There are too many people and too few jobs. People don't want another hurdle like unions making it tougher to get a job.
2. Unions are fairly corrupt and inflexible. Once established they protect mediocracy. Good workers are forbidden to excel for fear they will make median and poor workers look bad. Seniority rather than capability is the standard for promotions. And the leaders make sure they take good care of themselves and their friends through cronyism.
Still, unions remain important because of the power of collective bargaining. Bargaining as a group, rather than on a individual basis gives employees more power. Unless you are a golden boy with skills unmatched, then an employer has all the power when it comes to negotiations. If we could get honest unions who truly serve employees while not damaging the business, then things would be just fine.
The union forces no one to pay dues, you choose to work at a represented workplace .
Really I know of no one at union shops who complains about dues except for extreme right wing republicans.or their useful idiot.
Heres how that works if you work in a union shop and refuse to pay dues under right to work, the union still negotiates salaries and benefits for you and will represent you in oasha cases disciplinary is iffy whether they are forced to defend you or not for free whether you contribute dues or not.
Under agency shop bills if you refuse to pay dues you still are required by law to pay 85% of the dues for the services rendered.
It is still the act of forcing employees to join and pay dues to an organization they want nothing to do with?
I pity right to work states.
Working in a job without being forced to have any representation may seem desirable at first. When you look deeper, you may notice that people are still lining up for union jobs, one that protects workers rights and safety and pays a decent wage.
I have heard workers complain about working conditions and inadequate pay more often.
They could get a job where there isn't a union.
Problem solved.
Baloney. What if that is the only place in town to work?
Baloney. What if that is the only place in town to work?
They can move to where non-union jobs are.
Or aren't they willing to do what they have to to improve their lives?
That's what y'all say the unemployed should do, right?
Now apply your perspective to businesses in small towns who would, or will, refuse to render services to gays.
So what you are saying is if they don't like it...they should just pack up and leave extended family behind and go elsewhere because a fascist labor union prevents them from working without joining the union and paying dues?
It is still the act of forcing employees to join and pay dues to an organization they want nothing to do with?
Blah, blah, blah...
All the spin on why unions are a good thing do nothing to justify making everyone pay the union even if they don't want to become a member.
If you had a case, then you would also be justified in making pop pay for the "protection" he didn't ask for...all because other shops on the street pay for that protection, too. I mean, THAT'S for his own good, as well...right?
Face it, lpast, you are trying to justify extortion. Why do you support such a thing?
More blah blah blah from a obviously non informed individual, dont want to pay union dues DONT TAKE THE JOB not hard no one is forcing you.
~snipped the blah, blah, blah~
No it isnt the presently employed individuals of the company vote if they want the union or they do not. If they choose to accept the union then everyone Hired after that has a choice take the job and join the union or dont take the job. No one is forced
That is fine, but if they opt out (and many do), they should work at different pay and benefits than those who are union. Goes both ways.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?