Boeing, unions, and the right to work

[bripat9643]

And it's hard to be civil to wing nuts when they are obviously ignorant.

1) Being forced to join a Union is NOT a "violation of your rights". If you think it is prove it.

That's easy: any time force is initiated against an individual, it's a violation of his rights. What could be a more obvious case than being "forced" to join a union? You even admit you are forced to join.

2) According to your logic I should be able to join any private organization and then petition the government to get them to change their rules to fit MY beliefs.

Wrong. That isn't my logic. Forced union membership is imposed by the government. IF the feds didn't force private corporations to "bargain" with unions, why would they do it? I would tell the union to go to hell and hire whoever I wanted to hire.

Why is it that people like you PREACH small government but then ask them to come to your rescue and interfere with private contracts?

If you want to allow freely negotiated contracts, then get the federal government out of the middle. You have to be a total moron not to understand that the federal government forces private corporations to sign contracts with unions. They don't do it voluntarily. Anyone who claims they do is either an imbecile or a bald-faced liar.

 

[DaGoose]

Everybody's free to be a complete douche and join a union. I've never known anyone worth their salt that was a union member.

Then you know nothing about the men and women who make up unionized work forces. In my union and all of the different trades we hire in special circumstances do NOT put up with anyone who does not do their share of the work.

.

 

[Jack Fate]

The meaning of "rights" is very fluid in lefty la la land.

 

[Too Tall]

1) Being forced to join a Union is NOT a "violation of your rights". If you think it is prove it.

If it was against my religion to join a union it would be a 'violation of my rights.'

2) According to your logic I should be able to join any private organization and then petition the government to get them to change their rules to fit MY beliefs.

I am of the opinion that the Unions use coersion and the threat of a strike to get many of the 'rules' in a contract. The conversation goes something like this: Agree to our demands or we close down your business.

Why is it that people like you PREACH small government but then ask them to come to your rescue and interfere with private contracts?

Paying or not paying dues to a union should be my decision. And it is in the states with a right to work law.

 

[Jack Fate]

I've worked in unions in both right to work and non states. Nothing but a bunch of nasty backstabbers in the forced union jobs I had. You do what you're told and you vote how you're told.

 

[Care4all]

fyi

"Right to work" is simply a loophole of Section 14(b) of the National Labor Relations Act that enables a state to forbid union security clauses in union contracts.

This was enacted as part of the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947, which the Republican-controlled 80th Congress passed over the veto of President Harry S. Truman. Union security clauses require all workers receiving benefits from a collective bargaining agreement to share administrative costs. By outlawing union security clauses, "right-to-work" laws give workers a "right to freeload."

Sadly, Mr. Budd repeats the canards that there are "forms of forced union membership" and "union campaign operatives use forced dues to elect politicians beholden to 'Big Labor's' agenda."

The facts are that federal law prohibits closed shops where workers are required to join the union before they can hire on. Similarly, workers can never be forced to join a union, union security clause or not. Also, under federal law workers cannot be forced to pay dues money for any union political activity.

When "right to work" (for less) laws are passed, real data shows that wages and benefits decline for all workers. Even if businesses increase profits, state sales and income tax revenues fall.

'Right to Work' cuts wages, benefits | Greater Southeastern Massachusetts Labor Council

 

[Momanohedhunter]

You're preaching to the choir. With all of the legal protections workers have now, unions are an anachronism. We probably have more lawyers now than union folks.

More like bloated, corrupt, and thuggish money gathering machines for the Democrat political machine. Having a Democrat majority has done more bad for the unions then good. This whole issue here has shown why Mexico, Taiwan, and China get our jobs, and who sends them there.

 

[Trajan]

I love when Conservatives call for government regulation of private contracts....

I think I see your point, but can you expound a bit?

"Right to work" laws are laws that forbid companies and unions from agreeing that all employees become members of the union.

A perfect example of the government stepping in, and interfering in the free market.

and the inverse was true before taft hartley, and moving forward, the nlrb trying to finagle a rule ala Delta airlines union votes, in that that only union members who show up to vote, reaching a plurality would unionize the shop? The union security agreement? How about card Check?

if we are going to have an argument ala the majority rules ( as in rtw even after a vote allows individuals to drop out) completely and simply hey, thats fine by me, but its riddled with pratfalls.

 

[Trajan]

fyi

"Right to work" is simply a loophole of Section 14(b) of the National Labor Relations Act that enables a state to forbid union security clauses in union contracts.

This was enacted as part of the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947, which the Republican-controlled 80th Congress passed over the veto of President Harry S. Truman. Union security clauses require all workers receiving benefits from a collective bargaining agreement to share administrative costs. By outlawing union security clauses, "right-to-work" laws give workers a "right to freeload."

Sadly, Mr. Budd repeats the canards that there are "forms of forced union membership" and "union campaign operatives use forced dues to elect politicians beholden to 'Big Labor's' agenda."

The facts are that federal law prohibits closed shops where workers are required to join the union before they can hire on. Similarly, workers can never be forced to join a union, union security clause or not. Also, under federal law workers cannot be forced to pay dues money for any union political activity.

When "right to work" (for less) laws are passed, real data shows that wages and benefits decline for all workers. Even if businesses increase profits, state sales and income tax revenues fall.

'Right to Work' cuts wages, benefits | Greater Southeastern Massachusetts Labor Council

the benefits of a rtw state are it appears in contention then, from the OP-

As of now there are 22 right to work states and 28 that are not. From 2000-2009 the rtw states have grown faster than their counterparts in virtually every aspect: 54.6% to 41.1% in gross state product, 53.3% to 40.6% in personal income, 11.9% to 6.1% in population, 4.1% to -0.6% in payrolls.

A 2010 study in the CATO Journal reports that between 2000 and 2008 4.8 million people have moved from a forced-union to a rtw state. And the rtw states had a 23% higher growth rate in per capita income.

also-

A union security agreement is a contractual agreement, usually part of a union collective bargaining agreement, in which an employer and a trade or labor union agree on the extent to which the union may compel employees to join the union, and/or whether the employer will collect dues, fees, and assessments on behalf of the union.[1]


and let be real, IF as I am you are in a union and wish to start a process by which you want to disentangle yourself, you will be shunned, you will be in fear of your job and the pressure due to being ostracized will be great.

IF as the unions claim un-due pressure is brought on employees to NOT unionize via corporate machinations is great, which I have to say I find laughable now, the pressure to join is even greater.

 

[code1211]

By having "right to work", you keep the unions honest. I don't want any unions giving my dues to politicians of any political party. Not having right to work laws is what liberals want. Then they can cry when their jobs go overseas from their own policies, but instead will blame those greedy republican corporotists. They're dumber than a monkey fuckin' a racoon.

1) If you're, in fact, a Union member you can pay a reduced fee whereby none of your dues go to political contributions. It's the law.

2) Do you honestly believe that if there were no Unions that no more jobs would be sent overseas or across the border?
.

Do you honestly bvelieve that the faster growth of jobs in Right to Work states as compared to Union states is a coincidence?

 

[code1211]

What exactly do you think "Right to work" laws are?

They're government interference in the market.

In this case, we are discussing the rights of workers to work in the manner that they would prefer. In the real world today, this is turning more and more into work at all.

The individual worker will work under the rules of the company that pays him, of course. In states where unions are endorsed by the inaction of the government, that employee will work under those rules and the rules of the union. In the event that the provider of the job leaves the area, the union will not emply that worker.

In right to work states, the individual is protected from the compulsion to join the union. As with most of our rights, the weak are as protected as the strong by the power of government. In the Backward Land that Obamam endorses, the rights of the individual are sacrificed for the priviledge of the powerful unions.

Would you also argue for the right of gangs like the Klan to forcibly prevent individuals that they select from exercising their rights? That is another organization that existed by the inaction of government.

How about street gangs? Foreign invaders? Political action committees? Church groups?

There are many and various organizations that would like to increase their memebership and would do so to both control others and to gain power and wealth. Should the government be enjoined from regulating any of these? All of these?

You tell me. Are individual rights not important to you?

Please explain how individual rights are threatened.

According the the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) only 6.9 percent of the private workforce are Union, and even less than that are Closed Shop.

Union Members Summary

Simply put....If you do not want to join the Union in a Closed Shop state then don't apply at a Unionized place.

See? You're free to work wherever you want. Now THERE'S your "Right to Work"!!

.

As long as you work where the powerful tell you that you can. Separate but equal must have been one of your favorite policies.

 

[code1211]

Please explain how individual rights are threatened.

According the the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) only 6.9 percent of the private workforce are Union, and even less than that are Closed Shop.
.

Being forced to join a union is a violation of your rights. So what you're saying is that you don't give a damn that the government violates the rights of 7% of the private workforce.



According to that logic, a protection racket isn't a violation of your rights since you can move to a neighborhood where they don't have one. Why should a third party have a right to interfere in a contract between you and an employer? It has no such right, and anyone who claims it does is no better than a common thug.

See? You're free to work wherever you want. Now THERE'S your "Right to Work"!!

.

It's hard to be civil to libtards when they are such obvious jackasses.

And it's hard to be civil to wing nuts when they are obviously ignorant.

1) Being forced to join a Union is NOT a "violation of your rights". If you think it is prove it.

2) According to your logic I should be able to join any private organization and then petition the government to get them to change their rules to fit MY beliefs.

Why is it that people like you PREACH small government but then ask them to come to your rescue and interfere with private contracts?

.

Are you joking?

 

[code1211]

I love when Conservatives call for government regulation of private contracts....

Nobody's calling for any such thing.

Actually, civilization is regulation. Without regulation and enforcement, the strong get it all and the weak get nothing.

By allowing Unions to force membership, government gives them a free hand, The individual is no longer an entity, legally, when a union is in place.

By allowing individulas to work without the coercian of the union intervening, the individual once again becomes an agent in the transaction.

 

[Trajan]

Being forced to join a union is a violation of your rights. So what you're saying is that you don't give a damn that the government violates the rights of 7% of the private workforce.



According to that logic, a protection racket isn't a violation of your rights since you can move to a neighborhood where they don't have one. Why should a third party have a right to interfere in a contract between you and an employer? It has no such right, and anyone who claims it does is no better than a common thug.



It's hard to be civil to libtards when they are such obvious jackasses.

And it's hard to be civil to wing nuts when they are obviously ignorant.

1) Being forced to join a Union is NOT a "violation of your rights". If you think it is prove it.

2) According to your logic I should be able to join any private organization and then petition the government to get them to change their rules to fit MY beliefs.

Why is it that people like you PREACH small government but then ask them to come to your rescue and interfere with private contracts?

.

Are you joking?

hes not. sadly.

 

[code1211]

Everybody's free to be a complete douche and join a union. I've never known anyone worth their salt that was a union member.

Then you know nothing about the men and women who make up unionized work forces. In my union and all of the different trades we hire in special circumstances do NOT put up with anyone who does not do their share of the work.

.

Trade unions, Boiler Makers, Pipe Fitters, Electricians and so on are not the same as labor unions like UAW, Retail Clerks and AFL-CIO.

Trade unions train, apprentice and require ongoing education of their membership and in truth gaurentee the quality and the workmanship of the products and services provided. Trade unions provide a ready pool of trained and qualified individuals for contract hiring to draw on. Trade unions provide the follow ups on the workmanship of their members.

Labor unions try to mandate working conditions and pay rates for their membership in spite of prevailing economic conditions. In many cases this restricts a company's ability to respond to opportunities quickly and nimbly.

There are even negotiated clauses in labor contracts that restrict the amount of increased procuctivity by individuals that the union will tolerate. This type of clause resulted in a unionized work force locally in the Indianapolis area of about 350 being put out of work as the employer transferred those jobs to a Tennessee Facility.

Trade Unions raise the quality and quantity of work and depend on individuals constantly improving their skills to produce results.

Labor unions define the value of a workers output and refuse to allow any increses in that output without increased compensation. If the profits increase, the union views this as a loss.

Think of Trade Unions as a flowing stream and Labor Unions as a stagnent cess pool.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Where does Obama get off telling Boeing they cannot hire people in SC because of unions in WA???

A private company being told where they can operate and who they have to hire, this is criminal.

I hope the next Republican POTUS drags Obama and his people into court over these criminal decisions.

 

[Too Tall]

I've worked in unions in both right to work and non states. Nothing but a bunch of nasty backstabbers in the forced union jobs I had. You do what you're told and you vote how you're told.

I was a Shop Steward in the IAM&AW for a little over a year. At the meetings we spent the first 10 minutes voting to send money to Unions that were on strike. When we went on strike, we discovered that the President and VP had taken several million dollars (what was left in the strike fund) and went to Argentina. Instead of getting a stipend for manning the picket line, we got nothing.

The major problem I had with the Union was the fact that they were inflexible and would not negotiate in good faith. The strike could have been avoided if they had been made a few reasonable concessions.

 

[GoneBezerk]

So what you're saying is unions are criminal organizations where the leadership shakes down the "lower people" and takes their money for their own pleasures.

I saw a bunch of union thugs in Vegas last summer and I thought their "workers" back home probably don't realize they're paying for their scum leaders' party in Vegas.

I've worked in unions in both right to work and non states. Nothing but a bunch of nasty backstabbers in the forced union jobs I had. You do what you're told and you vote how you're told.

I was a Shop Steward in the IAM&AW for a little over a year. At the meetings we spent the first 10 minutes voting to send money to Unions that were on strike. When we went on strike, we discovered that the President and VP had taken several million dollars (what was left in the strike fund) and went to Argentina. Instead of getting a stipend for manning the picket line, we got nothing.

The major problem I had with the Union was the fact that they were inflexible and would not negotiate in good faith. The strike could have been avoided if they had been made a few reasonable concessions.

 

[DaGoose]

And it's hard to be civil to wing nuts when they are obviously ignorant.

1) Being forced to join a Union is NOT a "violation of your rights". If you think it is prove it.

2) According to your logic I should be able to join any private organization and then petition the government to get them to change their rules to fit MY beliefs.

Why is it that people like you PREACH small government but then ask them to come to your rescue and interfere with private contracts?

.

Are you joking?

hes not. sadly.

Then you'll have no problem showing me where your rights are being violated and why the government hasn't prosecuted the violaters.

See you can SAY that your "rights are being violated", but it's quite another showing or proving it.

.

 

[DaGoose]

By having "right to work", you keep the unions honest. I don't want any unions giving my dues to politicians of any political party. Not having right to work laws is what liberals want. Then they can cry when their jobs go overseas from their own policies, but instead will blame those greedy republican corporotists. They're dumber than a monkey fuckin' a racoon.

1) If you're, in fact, a Union member you can pay a reduced fee whereby none of your dues go to political contributions. It's the law.

2) Do you honestly believe that if there were no Unions that no more jobs would be sent overseas or across the border?
.

Do you honestly bvelieve that the faster growth of jobs in Right to Work states as compared to Union states is a coincidence?

Nice dodge to the question.

Next time just say you don't know.

.