Michigan Becomes A Right To Work State

12 Dec 2012 11:43 #21 by cydl

Grady wrote: Bottom line is why should anybody be forced to join a union or to pay dues to a union to hold a job? If the unions are doing such a bang up job of supporting the workers, wouldn't all workers be clamoring to join and participate?

Edit to add: Why should union dues be used to support political causes or candidates that individual members would not condone supporting?


My thought, too. If the union is indeed doing a great job of representing their constituents I would think the workers would be eager to join up. Perhaps the unions need to re-evaluate the job their doing for their membership if workers are disinclined to participate.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

12 Dec 2012 11:46 #22 by plaidvillain
You can't join the Chamber of Commerce without paying their dues. One could argue they function essentially the same as a union, but for local small business owners. Not joining can have a significant negative impact on a small business. So why shouldn't an independent business owner be able to join and enjoy the perks of being part of/connected to the Chamber without paying any dues?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

12 Dec 2012 12:02 - 12 Dec 2012 13:33 #23 by Grady

plaidvillain wrote: You can't join the Chamber of Commerce without paying their dues. One could argue they function essentially the same as a union, but for local small business owners. Not joining can have a significant negative impact on a small business. So why shouldn't an independent business owner be able to join and enjoy the perks of being part of/connected to the Chamber without paying any dues?

Instead of forcing workers to join, maybe this is the approach the unions ought to take.

edit to add: Let me re-word this. Instead of forcing workers to pay $$$$$ to unions , maybe this is the approach the unions ought to take.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

12 Dec 2012 12:27 #24 by LadyJazzer
In Michigan, no one was "forced" to join the union. They were required, as I've already stated, to contribute to the costs of negotiating their better working conditions, which is only fair. There were NOT required to "join the union." In fact that is prohibited.... But since the Righties operate in a fact-free-environment, I wouldn't expect that to sink in.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

12 Dec 2012 15:29 #25 by Something the Dog Said

cydl wrote:

Grady wrote: Bottom line is why should anybody be forced to join a union or to pay dues to a union to hold a job? If the unions are doing such a bang up job of supporting the workers, wouldn't all workers be clamoring to join and participate?

Edit to add: Why should union dues be used to support political causes or candidates that individual members would not condone supporting?


My thought, too. If the union is indeed doing a great job of representing their constituents I would think the workers would be eager to join up. Perhaps the unions need to re-evaluate the job their doing for their membership if workers are disinclined to participate.

Perhaps posters could actually understand the facts before pontificating about them. Under the National Labor Relations Act, (title 29, section 151 of the United States Code), membership in a union is not required for employment. The Supreme Court has held that the union must still support nonmembers equally as union members in collective bargaining negotiations, and can not discriminate against them. Further the Supreme Court held in Communications Workers v. Beck, that nonmembers do not have to pay union dues, but must pay an agency fee that the union can prove is their proportionate share of the union costs of collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievance adjustment with their employer.

Sounds fair does it not? Employees are not required to join the union, can drop out of the union, and can not be treated any differently than union members. They do not have to pay dues, but just their share of the costs of the union in negotitating and support of grievances.

Yet, the republicans in Michigan took that away. The new laws say that non members can simply free ride on the union, get the benefits of the union and not pay their fair share of the costs of the benefits. Further, the republicans also put in the law that the residents of Michigan can not vote on this issue themselves through referendum.

"Remember to always be yourself. Unless you can be batman. Then always be batman." Unknown

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

12 Dec 2012 15:34 #26 by FredHayek
Guess the Dems will just have to take back the state legislature & office of Gov. and reverse the Republican vote. NPR says the Republican will lose the statehouse in January and LJ predicts the Republican governor will not be re-elected.

Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

12 Dec 2012 15:38 #27 by LadyJazzer
LJ also said: "In Michigan, no one was "forced" to join the union. They were required, as I've already stated, to contribute to the costs of negotiating their better working conditions, which is only fair. There were NOT required to "join the union." In fact that is prohibited.... But since the Righties operate in a fact-free-environment, I wouldn't expect that to sink in."

LJ has also suggested that Walker, Snyder, Scott and perhaps Kasich are going to be targeted. Could I be wrong? Possibly...But I don't think so.

(Edited to add:

And by the way, Mitch McConnell's approval rating is 37%...(Compared to a 55% DISAPPROVAL rating) And Ashley JUDD is already getting a better approval rating and she's not even running... And he's up for reelection in 2014... Wear THAT... :biggrin:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

12 Dec 2012 16:29 #28 by Blazer Bob

LadyJazzer wrote: LJ has also suggested that Walker, Snyder, Scott and perhaps Kasich are going to be targeted. Could I be wrong? Possibly...But I don't think so.



Rewriting history allready?

LadyJazzer wrote: It ain't over...And I predict that Snyder, Walker and Scott will not be governors after their next elections.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

12 Dec 2012 16:30 #29 by LadyJazzer
What history?...What "rewrite"?... You think I'd actually be as convinced as the TeaBaggers were of Mitt-Flop's win this early?... Yeah, I think they're going to be replaced... Would I put money on it?...Not yet..

You want to put some money on whether on not the tax-rates on the top 2% are going to rise?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

12 Dec 2012 16:39 #30 by Martin Ent Inc
In Fl I was in the union, our union did ok when my Dad was coming up, but whe I and me brothers finished our apprenticeship thigs went south fast.
FL is a right to work state.
The BA's sucked up to the corps using our trade, and screwed us totally.
My brother and I went out and started our own Non Union company. We paid Prevailing Wage, or the same that the union workers paid without the Union enforced charges (to the company not workers) and our employees were very happy.
We did very well building at MGM studios and Disney along with Cape Canaveral and other places that were for the most part Union shops.
we also worked along side some of our former union brothers without a hitch.
So all the hoopla over what is going on in Michigan is just media hype as usual.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.163 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+