• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Michigan - Unions will no longer run our state

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Right to work shows up in Michigan
4:18PM EST December 6. 2012 - Today, Michigan legislators have announced their intention to make Michigan the 24th right-to-work state, which would allow employees to work at a business without being forced to pay union dues.
Link

Now let the cracks start showing up in all the other states
 

Pr0d1gy

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2005
7,776
0
76
Ronald Reagan: "They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost."

Ronald Reagan: "they have made it clear that they never had any intention of restoring one of the most elemental human rights&#8212;the right to belong to a free trade union."

Yeah, you guys are great Republicans. lol


http://shoqvalue.com/ronald-reagan-where-collective-bargaining-is-forbidden-freedom-is-lost

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/02/25/146460/flashback-reagan-union-right/
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Unions should not have the power to run/ruin a company.

Unions should not have the power over a worker in saying/stating the conditions that they have to meet in order to work.
 
Last edited:

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
Ronald Reagan: "They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost."

Ronald Reagan: "they have made it clear that they never had any intention of restoring one of the most elemental human rights—the right to belong to a free trade union."

Yeah, you guys are great Republicans. lol
Unions are not being forbidden, and people have the right to belong to a union if they want. What is being changed is the union ability to force people into joining a union if they don't want to.

I guess it took a while for MI to figure out that they were going to continue to be the economic laughing stock if they didn't take some steps forward.
 

3chordcharlie

Diamond Member
Mar 30, 2004
9,861
1
81
Unions are not being forbidden, and people have the right to belong to a union if they want. What is being changed is the union ability to force people into joining a union if they don't want to.

I guess it took a while for MI to figure out that they were going to continue to be the economic laughing stock if they didn't take some steps forward.
That's a joke right?

You really ought to defend this on its merits, not with doublespeak.

Right-to-work is not enacted to protect workers from union dues, it is an end-run around the entire collective bargaining process and issue.

It is designed to encourage stable labor relations, but with minimal ability for employees to pressure employers for any changes whatsoever (pay, conditions, etc).
 

notposting

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2005
3,484
12
81
You realize that unions derive their power from the workers who VOTE to join one (or join an already formed union, thus effectively voting to join it).

Unfortunately, looks like we will have to regress back to the conditions found earlier in our history to change minds.

Why would they have the power to run or ruin a company? And I'm not quite sure what your second statement is saying (typo)?

Anyways, I am a union member (limited energy installer/tech, IBEW LU 58) and have seen and heard about good and bad.

Good: our pay, benefits, working hours, training, safety. Everything is spelled out in the contract. There is no "stay a little bit" stretching into working a little bit longer everyday for no additional pay. Saturday? Sure, that will be time and a half. You want me to do what without a safety harness? Go buy me one and we'll talk.

Bad: "corrupt union bosses" YEP. Between the International HQ doing their best to fuck us in their own way and our own local having had such corrupt leaders we had a DOL investigation result in a new vote a few years ago, I believe it. I worked with a guy who had been a UAW steward for several years before taking a buyout and joining our apprenticeship. He was sick of THE UNION (oh wait, there is more than one?)--his local UAW chapter--defending some of the turds who they should have been tossing out the door.

Of course, a few shady people evidently means the few thousand brothers and sisters who have joined the union will lose out. Maybe we should treat corporations the same way? When one corporation does something wrong we should then dissolve ALL of them? And per Snyder's quotes yesterday, should I have a choice in paying my taxes for this year? If the state isn't winning my support maybe I should withhold it.

But it's okay, dismiss anything I say as being a union shill.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
29,999
3,486
126
Not even a slick tongue can savage the basic need for "right to work".

Your wailing against it is hollow.
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,304
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
Good: our pay, benefits, working hours, training, safety. Everything is spelled out in the contract. There is no "stay a little bit" stretching into working a little bit longer everyday for no additional pay. Saturday? Sure, that will be time and a half. You want me to do what without a safety harness? Go buy me one and we'll talk.
Up until Jan 1st I work as a supervisor in a non-union shop.

My guys have good pay and benefits, working hours, training, safety.........

They get paid time and a half after the first 8 hours and double time after 12. They get paid time and half on Saturday for the first 12 and double time beyond 12. They get paid double time on Sundays and holidays (Plus a 8 hour holiday pay).

The company meets or exceeds OSHA standards, all safety equipment is provided by the company (including a pair of safety shoes and eye exam/prescription safety glasses yearly). The company has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to safety.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,833
1
0
Up until Jan 1st I work as a supervisor in a non-union shop.

My guys have good pay and benefits, working hours, training, safety.........

They get paid time and a half after the first 8 hours and double time after 12. They get paid time and half on Saturday for the first 12 and double time beyond 12. They get paid double time on Sundays and holidays (Plus a 8 hour holiday pay).

The company meets or exceeds OSHA standards, all safety equipment is provided by the company (including a pair of safety shoes and eye exam/prescription safety glasses yearly). The company has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to safety.

Nobody is saying that all non-union jobs are low paid etc... The issue is that when unions are less powerful, wages and benefits are worse overall.

Otherwise corporations wouldn't be opposed to unions... and they wouldn't be pushing for "right to work". I mean think about it. Unless they think they can extract more profit from workers, why would they be anti-union?
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
You realize that unions derive their power from the workers who VOTE to join one (or join an already formed union, thus effectively voting to join it).

Unfortunately, looks like we will have to regress back to the conditions found earlier in our history to change minds.

Why would they have the power to run or ruin a company? And I'm not quite sure what your second statement is saying (typo)?
Clarified statement #2.

Unions should not have the power to run/ruin a company.

Unions should not have the power over a worker in saying/stating the conditions that they have to meet in order to work.
A union that can dictate how a company is to be run should not have such power.
As demonstrated with Delphi/Indiana, the union caused the plant to close rather than concede certain demands.
 

Nintendesert

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2010
7,761
5
0
I've never been able to wrap my mind around the concept of forcing someone to join a union and forcibly taking part of their paycheck just for working somewhere. I must have a misconception of what actually happens because that just seems wrong.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,947
2,325
126
Nobody is saying that all non-union jobs are low paid etc... The issue is that when unions are less powerful, wages and benefits are worse overall.

Otherwise corporations wouldn't be opposed to unions... and they wouldn't be pushing for "right to work". I mean think about it. Unless they think they can extract more profit from workers, why would they be anti-union?
Because there are a ton of examples of unions demanding (and sometimes getting) benefits/wages that are completely unsustainable and they fear that a union has the ability (not that it WILL happen just that it CAN) to put them out of business one day?
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,435
84
91
Nobody is saying that all non-union jobs are low paid etc... The issue is that when unions are less powerful, wages and benefits are worse overall.

Otherwise corporations wouldn't be opposed to unions... and they wouldn't be pushing for "right to work". I mean think about it. Unless they think they can extract more profit from workers, why would they be anti-union?
Tennesee is a right to work state. Every few years the UAW tries to get Nissan employees to become unionized. Each time a vote is taken by the employees they have given the UAW a thumbs down. The management of Nissan has no say in it. The employees are the ones making the decision.

Nissan would have probably never opened a very large north American manufacturing facility here in the state if they knew that anyone they hired would be required to join a union.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
16,963
4,700
136
Up until Jan 1st I work as a supervisor in a non-union shop.

My guys have good pay and benefits, working hours, training, safety.........

They get paid time and a half after the first 8 hours and double time after 12. They get paid time and half on Saturday for the first 12 and double time beyond 12. They get paid double time on Sundays and holidays (Plus a 8 hour holiday pay).

The company meets or exceeds OSHA standards, all safety equipment is provided by the company (including a pair of safety shoes and eye exam/prescription safety glasses yearly). The company has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to safety.
Gee, we have very similar backgrounds. The difference is I realize why the people are paid for holidays, overtime, and double time. Clue, it has nothing to do with management.

Read a history book once in a while.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,086
493
126
Nobody is saying that all non-union jobs are low paid etc... The issue is that when unions are less powerful, wages and benefits are worse overall.

Otherwise corporations wouldn't be opposed to unions... and they wouldn't be pushing for "right to work". I mean think about it. Unless they think they can extract more profit from workers, why would they be anti-union?
Unions in the private sector havent been powerful for decades. They represent a small % of the private workforce. Yet we havent devolved into 1800s style work conditions. And wages continue to rise, not plummet to min wage. Why is that?
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
Call us when working conditions in the US non-union shops hit The Jungle level...

...meanwhile, TRoTCompetingW is competing for the work that necessitates these jobs and locally, our Fed is happily letting every illegal we can get in, save for a few token ones caught to save face/keep the budget train rolling.

American Laborers probably should start thinking about maybe ponying up for $30 a month co-pays instead of whining that the $20 they're paying is burdensome as they put nut A on bolt B for $22.50 an hour.

The delusions some have are truly spectacular sometimes...

Chuck
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
That's a joke right?

You really ought to defend this on its merits, not with doublespeak.

Right-to-work is not enacted to protect workers from union dues, it is an end-run around the entire collective bargaining process and issue.
How is not forcing people to join a union against their will in any way an "end-run around the entire collective bargaining process"?? If people want to form a union and they see a benefit in doing so, they can do so. The only thing changing is that people are no longer forced to join the union if they decide they don't want to.

All the howling and whining from leftists over this is just smoke and mirrors to obfuscate the core issue: they want people to be forced to join unions whether the workers want to or not. If unions truly protect and benefit workers, and if they're a net benefit to everyone, then there would be no reason to have to force people to join one.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
Gee, we have very similar backgrounds. The difference is I realize why the people are paid for holidays, overtime, and double time. Clue, it has nothing to do with management.

Read a history book once in a while.
Just because something has a certain historical origin doesn't mean times haven't changed. I am very grateful for some of the benefits every worker (union or not) enjoys because of what unions did in the past. That doesn't mean they are still beneficial/useful/needed today.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,086
493
126
I think the UAW and CAW would disagree.
Those are in specific industry. Overall private membership in Unions has dropped from nearly 4 in 10 in the 50s to about 1 in 10 now. Their power in the private workforce is low now and erroding more and more.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY