What do you think about "right to work" states?

[Pohemi]

If unions are so bad, why do police have one?

Side topic: The police union isn't even the problematic org, it's the Fraternal Order of Police that does all the fuckery getting cops off for breaking the law and their oaths on the job. They need to be disbanded IMHO.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I’ve never been part of a union that I liked or that I thought did anything to help the workers. That being said, I support the right of workers to unionize. If a company is being such an ass that workers feel they need to unionize then I’m all for it.

Personally I’d rather have better regulations that protect the workers and a government that puts its thumb on the scale in favor of the worker. As it stands now, I feel both regulations and unions are rather weak and do little for most workers.

Ideally, but that's basically communism, as even strong socialist countries just outsource their corrupt capitalist behavior. Which, that's what it boils down to, because of Peoples' corruption, they always seek to exploit people for power, so you can do whatever governance or economic policy you want, and its gonna end up the same way if people let it.

 

[ivwshane]

I don't think you should be fired for not joining a union but I also don't think you should get benefits of union collective bargaining without joining the union. If you think you are better off bargaining individually with a multi-billion dollar corporation, have at it, but don't freeload off the union.

I would agree but we all know that Union leadership is trained to put pressure on non union members and that often gets trickled down to union members who then give shit to non union workers.

 

[MtnMan]

If unions are so bad, why do police have one?

Because it is much harder to fire a bad cop. Many bad cops are still on the job because of union protection.

 

[sportage]

I'l give a perfect example of what RIGHT TO WORK really stands for. Back in San Diego I had a friend who worked for 7-11. The guy needed a week off AND had that vacation time coming yet the manager denied the vacation request. The guy really needed the time off because his mother back in Minnesota had a stroke. The manager did eventually reluctantly grant the vacation time however insisted that it be unpaid vacation time. Remember, this guy had already earned the vacation time and as paid, but the manager was pissy about being short an employee thus the manager would be forced to fill in himself, and so the manager refused to pay.

After returning from Minnesota, the guy went to the CA workforce (whatever the worker rights government agency is called???) and filed a complaint. HE WON. He won because if that manager has paid others in the past for vacation time then the manager must also pay this guy for vacation time. THAT was a decision under CA law AND allowed because CA IS NOT a right to work state.

Now... if this had happened in a "right to work" state, the manager could do whatever he wanted including denying vacation pay for vacation earned, and there would be NOT ONE THING this poor employee could do about it. If that same employee sought justice at some workers rights agency in a right to work state, the state would rule against the guy. Period.
THERE you have just one example of the so called RIGHT TO WORK philosophy.

Yeah, you have the right to work, but with NO path for justice if and when the employee is shit upon by the boss, by the manager, or by the company itself.

 

[Zorba]

I would agree but we all know that Union leadership is trained to put pressure on non union members and that often gets trickled down to union members who then give shit to non union workers.

Free loaders should be given shit.

 

[ivwshane]

Free loaders should be given shit.

You’ll have to explain how a worker is a freeloader.

 

[MrSquished]

You’ll have to explain how a worker is a freeloader.

They're freeloading off the benefits of the union but not contributing whatsoever.

 

[ivwshane]

They're freeloading off the benefits of the union but not contributing whatsoever.

Yeah except the post I was responding to and agreeing with said that if you don’t join a Union then you shouldn’t get the benefits of being in a union. So…how exactly would that be freeloading?

Do you guys support workers only workers who are apart of a union? For me I can support both because I recognize that workers aren’t the enemy, whether that’s a union worker or not, a worker who earns minimum wage or more, an illegal immigrant worker or a legal one, a minority or not.

But hey if you guys want to piss on workers who aren’t in your club that’s your business but just know you look like the other side of the same coin in the long list of people with power who wish to suppress others.

 

[WelshBloke]

Yeah except the post I was responding to and agreeing with said that if you don’t join a Union then you shouldn’t get the benefits of being in a union. So…how exactly would that be freeloading?

Do you guys support workers only workers who are apart of a union? For me I can support both because I recognize that workers aren’t the enemy, whether that’s a union worker or not, a worker who earns minimum wage or more, an illegal immigrant worker or a legal one, a minority or not.

But hey if you guys want to piss on workers who aren’t in your club that’s your business but just know you look like the other side of the same coin in the long list of people with power who wish to suppress others.

I mean I support workers that aren't in a union in the way that I go "yay! Go you guys", but I can't really support them any other way because... well they aren't part of the union. How are we supposed to negotiate on the behalf of people who choose not to be part of that negotiation?

 

[Zorba]

You’ll have to explain how a worker is a freeloader.

People that work in a union shop, getting union benefits and pay, but refuse to pay membership fees are freeloaders.

No way any company would actually give "right to workers" less than the union because the whole point is to weaken the union by getting people to freeload and not pay dues.

Union workers shouldn't give workers shit that are in non-union positions, though.

 

[ivwshane]

I mean I support workers that aren't in a union in the way that I go "yay! Go you guys", but I can't really support them any other way because... well they aren't part of the union. How are we supposed to negotiate on the behalf of people who choose not to be part of that negotiation?

You don’t negotiate on behalf of people who don’t want you to represent them.

That was easy!

 

[ivwshane]

People that work in a union shop, getting union benefits and pay, but refuse to pay membership fees are freeloaders.

Are you having trouble reading posts? Because I’ve already said twice now that I think it’s perfectly reasonable to exclude non Union members from the benefits they’ve negotiated.

 

[Zorba]

Are you having trouble reading posts? Because I’ve already said twice now that I think it’s perfectly reasonable to exclude non Union members from the benefits they’ve negotiated.

See my update, after I read your posts after the one I responded too. I read and respond linearly.

 

[WelshBloke]

You don’t negotiate on behalf of people who don’t want you to represent them.

That was easy!

So how do you want me to support them then?

 

[Zorba]

You don’t negotiate on behalf of people who don’t want you to represent them.

That was easy!

Not how it actually works. Glad you believe in republican make believe solutions to labor, though.

 

[ivwshane]

So how do you want me to support them then?

How about just not treating them like shit and calling them freeloaders?

 

[WelshBloke]

How about just not treating them like shit and calling them freeloaders?

Ummmm. I didn't do either of those things but ok?

But if workers don't care enough about their working conditions to band together to make a difference why should I try to band together with them?

 

[ivwshane]

Not how it actually works. Glad you believe in republican make believe solutions to labor, though.

As someone whose company has Union and non union employees, I can safely say yeah that is how it works.

As far as believing republicans, lol no, as I stated in a previous post (which I’m guessing you also failed to read), my solution would be more regulations and better support from the government. Imo unions are a poor solution to the problem.

 

[ivwshane]

Ummmm. I didn't do either of those things but ok?

But if workers don't care enough about their working conditions to band together to make a difference why should I try to band together with them?

This thread consists of more than just you posting. If you are having trouble following along then just say so.

 

[WelshBloke]

This thread consists of more than just you posting. If you are having trouble following along then just say so.

So you're for collective negotiations now?


I'm fine following the thread but if you address me personally then I'm going to assume that you are addressing me personally.

 

[Zorba]

As someone whose company has Union and non union employees, I can safely say yeah that is how it works.

As far as believing republicans, lol no, as I stated in a previous post (which I’m guessing you also failed to read), my solution would be more regulations and better support from the government. Imo unions are a poor solution to the problem.

You have union and non-union performing the same jobs with different pay and benefits? Where the only difference is who pays membership dues?

Outside of trade unions I've never heard of that before.

I believe in many right to work states that's actually illegal.

 

[DaaQ]

People that work in a union shop, getting union benefits and pay, but refuse to pay membership fees are freeloaders.

No way any company would actually give "right to workers" less than the union because the whole point is to weaken the union by getting people to freeload and not pay dues.

Union workers shouldn't give workers shit that are in non-union positions, though.

I worked in a split shop, I made less than the union ppl, but I chose my job due to it being in shipping driving a forklift. It had it's own inherent benefits and downsides, namely -60 degree freezer work.
Like I said the union is only as strong as the members representing you. Being a deep red area, they really were not forward thinking. A dime an hour raise after 5 years! Are you kidding me. I happened to be there during a contract negotiation, and most wanted lump sum payments. Not hourly increases that would obviously apply to OT too.
But I digress. The UFCW out of Louisville didn't give much of a shit about some chicken plant 3 hours away.

I remember they tried doing a hotdog cookout at 10pm (last break time) I told them to learn from the UAW. (I worked for them as well)

You have union and non-union performing the same jobs with different pay and benefits? Where the only difference is who pays membership dues?

Outside of trade unions I've never heard of that before.

I believe in many right to work states that's actually illegal.

No you have different departments that are secularized. Such as above, shipping was non union, but the processing floor was, marination wasn't.

 

[Zorba]

No you have different departments that are secularized. Such as above, shipping was non union, but the processing floor was, marination wasn't.

Yeah, I know. And in that situation the non-union groups are not freeloading. That is completely different than being in a union job and refusing to pay dues. @ivwshane was trying to conflate the two.

 

[Vic]

Still waiting to hear why labor shouldn't be allowed the same right to organize and receive the same legal protections that capital and corporations already enjoy.