"Right to Work (for less)" States

Cypress said:
In right to work states, employees in union shops are allowed to forgo making union dues payments.

Federal law already requires that no one has to join a union. But, in union states, one who accepts employment, wages and benefits that were negotiated by unions, they have to at least pay dues to the union -- to compensate them for their time and effort in achieving those wage and benefit contracts.

Why should someone get a free ride in a "right to work" state? Why should they take advantage of a wage and benefit contract (which is generally better, than an individual could have negotiated on their own) that a union spent time and money negotiating, without paying dues like everyone else did? In addition, the Union is legally required to defend an employee who is illegally fired, even if that employee chose not to pay union dues.

Or, as AFl-CIO states:
Click to expand...

The AFL-CIO shouldln't be cited as an expert on union matters any more than Microsoft is.

Step 1: don't require that people who are not paying union dues be given union contracts

Step 2: don't require unions to defend people who don't pay union dues.


Seems reasonable enough to me.
 
Darla said:
Are you serious? In fact, that is the usualy righty line to everything from sexual harrassment to low wages.

Don't like it? You can work somewhere else.

Get real Dano, you are so full of shit sometimes, it's astounding. And I say that not to insult you, but because you just really are. Full of shit. I mean, do you know it and giggle when you post this stuff? Or are you really that deluded?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I used to use that one too. I'll admit. All it really does is frustrate the other side, if they don't realize that it's a non-sequitor, and it doesn't get you anywhere, which is why I don't use it anymore...

Also, I just realized, I'm a socialist.
 
doniston said:
I have been opposed to unions mever since I was a kid, and was subject to their totalitarian laws. The union is fine for assuring work conditions, but wages should be determined by ability, not by longivity, etc.
Click to expand...
I was anti-Union until I managed in unionized shops. If I were to start a company that employed more than a nominal number of workers, I would insist on the formation / adoption of a union.
 
Troglodyte27 said:
How exactly?



Oh, wow! I passed 1000 posts.
Click to expand...

Evil businessman logic, sorry. If I controlled a company, I'd just make sure I had control over the union too, so I could pay them shit wages and tell them that if they had a problem, they always had the union, which I was "kind enough" to allow...

MWASHAHAHAHA!
 
TheDanold said:
This is just such ignorant nonsense. Last month my company bought licenses for a tool that makes it much easier for me to code JSPs, our productivity as a result is much higher. By your warped logic, I should somehow see my pay increase.
I mean fucking ROFL!
Which goes right back to my old point, in the 80's, the huge productivity gains came from machine automation, why on earth would that coincide with huge wage gains?
It wouldn't, wages went up just not as quickly as productivity, you seem to be relying on this total absurd fallacy that productivity gains MUST equal people working harder. Bullshit and you know it.


Pfff, I may as well accuse you of America bashing. They are doing worse than us, deal with it, it's not an insult, it's a fact.


Heh-heh and ranked for what? For wages or for purchasing power? You don't realize how stupid you are sounding here. What difference does it make how high your salary is when things cost so much more?
I've been to Europe, I've seen how people live there compared to here - we are doing better, even in poorer neighborhoods.
Why do you think Eastern European immigrants still flock all the way over to the US more than they do to Europe? They know what you in your ivory tower elitist student eyes have no ability to see plain and simple.

Lastly Finland's economy is hugely reliant on Nokia, Sweden on Ikea and natural resources and Norway on oil. Plus it's not like they can just pack up business and head to anywhere if taxes and regulations are too high, they're aren't any other countries that speak Finnish, Norwegian or Swedish.
The socialist models there don't succeed because they work but because it is difficult for business to pick up and move elsewhere. Not at all the situation America is in.
Click to expand...



Dano - You're either an idiot or obtuse. I'm leaning towards the former. Again.

First, the problem with your reliance on the technology aspect is that the largest growth in productivity occurred in the 1990s at a time when productivity and wages tracked quite closely. In short, the facts are against your anecdotal assertion.

Second, Norway and Sweden outrank the United States in quality of life as measured by your Economist. Look it up. I only mention it as a direct refutation of your (again anecdotal) assertion that unionized Europeans have a worse lifestyle than Americans. Clearly, if their quality of life is ranked higher than ours they do not have a worse life style. In fact, it is better. Once again, the facts aren't on your side.

Finally, you should learn when to give up. You're such a deadender it isn't funny.
 
It really depends on the nation...

France, Germany, and UK all have a worse quality of life than us in most measures. However, Norway and Sweden seem to do a hell of a lot better, even with more of the government in business. I don't really think, therefore, that it's a matter of how much government, rather than what kind of government, in many situations. It's not like Norway and Sweden aren't sometimes wasteful, now, Dano. But it doesn't seem to be making a very big difference.
 
Watermark said:
Evil businessman logic, sorry. If I controlled a company, I'd just make sure I had control over the union too, so I could pay them shit wages and tell them that if they had a problem, they always had the union, which I was "kind enough" to allow...

MWASHAHAHAHA!
Click to expand...
Shut up, dummy. Here's a dollar, go buy a clue.

When you've run something more significant than your mouth or the hot water tap, come back and we'll talk about how businesses run.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top