• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
digiram said:
If unions are so bad, why do police have one?
Click to expand...
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.
 
ivwshane said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
senseamp said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
MrSquished said:
They're freeloading off the benefits of the union but not contributing whatsoever.
Click to expand...

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.
 
ivwshane said:
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.
Click to expand...
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?
 
ivwshane said:
You’ll have to explain how a worker is a freeloader.
Click to expand...
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.
 
WelshBloke said:
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?
Click to expand...

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

That was easy!
 
Zorba said:
People that work in a union shop, getting union benefits and pay, but refuse to pay membership fees are freeloaders.
Click to expand...

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.
 
ivwshane said:
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.
Click to expand...
See my update, after I read your posts after the one I responded too. I read and respond linearly.
 
ivwshane said:
How about just not treating them like shit and calling them freeloaders?
Click to expand...
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?
 
Zorba said:
Not how it actually works. Glad you believe in republican make believe solutions to labor, though.
Click to expand...

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.
 
WelshBloke said:
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?
Click to expand...

This thread consists of more than just you posting. If you are having trouble following along then just say so.
 
ivwshane said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Zorba said:
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.
Click to expand...

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)
Zorba said:
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.
Click to expand...

No you have different departments that are secularized. Such as above, shipping was non union, but the processing floor was, marination wasn't.
 
DaaQ said:
No you have different departments that are secularized. Such as above, shipping was non union, but the processing floor was, marination wasn't.
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top