- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 66,461
- Reaction score
- 47,487
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Very Republican? You forget that it was a Republican judge, appointed by Tommy Thompson, who made that ruling.
When was it in your life that you really started to apply yourself? Was it when you were still living with your parents, or was it when you left, and ventured off on your own? Unions are vehicles of stagnation, think of entrophy. Unions bargain based on the lowest common denominator. They barter for mediocrity, and settle on function. The idea of the union is antithetical to individualism, an idea that we are the people, but we are individual people. There is strength in the unionized worker, that is for sure, but that strength comes at a price. That price is production! It's always about production, and performance. Unions avoid bargaining based on production and performance.
Tim-
There is no such thing as a "union right". There are legal actions permitted to them through law, and those actions can be prohibited the same way.
Ya know...I still have so little respect for those that left the state. That isn't how you handle a problem, ya know? I don't care what your issue is, what side you're on, you don't leave an argument like that when people are expecting you to represent them. Hiding in another state is a cowardly way to handle the issue.
unless you are the employer, where the practice of this same right in the same basic way is labeled collusion and anti-competitive.
Are libs really going to bust open the Crystal every time a lib lower court judge tries to stomp the rights of the people? This is headed to the SCOTUS and until then I'd keep it dry.
j-mac
I'm sorry that doesn't really answer my question. Perhaps you could be more specific and less theological.
It IS interesting. Here is a link on the Federal Court ruling in Illinois, which will have an effect on efforts to bust union activities in Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, and other states. If the Wisconsin ruling goes to Federal Court, or if Walker passes his law again, which will also end up in Federal court, this ruling will be cited. Of course, this has not been tested at the Supreme Court level yet, and I predict that the case will go that far.
Any privilege a union has is granted through law, not through constitutionally enumerated rights.
The right to assemble? It's pretty clearly stated in the 1st Amendment.
When was it in your life that you really started to apply yourself? Was it when you were still living with your parents, or was it when you left, and ventured off on your own? Unions are vehicles of stagnation, think of entrophy. Unions bargain based on the lowest common denominator. They barter for mediocrity, and settle on function. The idea of the union is antithetical to individualism, an idea that we are the people, but we are individual people. There is strength in the unionized worker, that is for sure, but that strength comes at a price. That price is production! It's always about production, and performance. Unions avoid bargaining based on production and performance.
Tim-
The right to assemble? It's pretty clearly stated in the 1st Amendment.
No one is trying to get rid of that right.
I was replying to someone who said that to be in a union is "a privilege". I'd say the 1st Amendment pretty much covers the right to be in a union. Is it not the right to assemble?
For Republicans to eliminate workers rights to assemble is actually the use of government to sway the market. It sways the market and the negotiation of wages away from workers (with the constitutionally protected right to assemble and the right to not be discriminated against for union membership based on federal law) solely to the employer. Many companies try to make it a fire-able offense to find out what your coworkers make. This, too, is an illegal and false hand upon the market. One can judge one's worth without knowing the worth of others.
If you believe it's okay to bust unions, then I assume you believe it's okay to be fired for party affiliation, yes? After all, your political affiliation is a privilege as well, yes? I don't see a constitutional protection that says Republicans shouldn't be fired.
These laws are a government intrusion into the marketplace of wage negotiation.
I was replying to someone who said that to be in a union is "a privilege". I'd say the 1st Amendment pretty much covers the right to be in a union. Is it not the right to assemble?
If you believe it's okay to bust unions, then I assume you believe it's okay to be fired for party affiliation, yes? After all, your political affiliation is a privilege as well, yes? I don't see a constitutional protection that says Republicans shouldn't be fired.
These laws are a government intrusion into the marketplace of wage negotiation.
And that's the crux right there. The idea of unions I can live with, the corrupt system by which they are still allowed to exist (And thrive) is what most people have a problem with.
Tim-
I was replying to someone who said that to be in a union is "a privilege". I'd say the 1st Amendment pretty much covers the right to be in a union. Is it not the right to assemble?
For Republicans to eliminate workers rights to assemble is actually the use of government to sway the market. It sways the market and the negotiation of wages away from workers (with the constitutionally protected right to assemble and the right to not be discriminated against for union membership based on federal law) solely to the employer. Many companies try to make it a fire-able offense to find out what your coworkers make. This, too, is an illegal and false hand upon the market. One can judge one's worth without knowing the worth of others.
If you believe it's okay to bust unions, then I assume you believe it's okay to be fired for party affiliation, yes? After all, your political affiliation is a privilege as well, yes? I don't see a constitutional protection that says Republicans shouldn't be fired.
These laws are a government intrusion into the marketplace of wage negotiation.
So, the only wasy workers can 'assemble', is to be in a union? I wasn't aware of that.
and what is it you observe which is corrupting within the unions?
Also interesting, those in the act of collective bargaining are exempt from public meeting laws
so, it would appear you find the unions no more corrupt than the employers with whom they are to bargainThe same thing that corrupts big business. Political quid pro quoism. IN addition whether private or public sector, unions have numerous legislative protections designed to strengthen their positions, and bargaining power, and weaken the corporate bargaining power. Legalized extortion comes to mind.
Tim-
The difference between your cited case and what is happening in Wisconsin is that the Teamsters Local 727 (from your link) is a private union. Not a public union.
Doesn't matter. Whether public or private, people still have the Contitutional right to assemble, and also to band together and seek a fair compensation for their resource, which is the sweat from their own brow. Adam Smith did not limit peoples' right to exploit resources to only those who own companies. EVERY person on this earth, industrialist and worker alike, has the right to exploit what they have for financial gain. The splitting of union hairs into public and private has no bearing on the Constitutionality of it, and is nothing more than a strawman, which is easily blown away in the wind of the Constitution of the United States of America.
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?