Reagan: "the RIGHT to belong to a free trade union...

[The Infidel]

There should be a right to join a union. And a right not to join a union and if you don't join a union, you shouldn't have to pay union dues.

There is not a single state in this country which requires you join a union.

It’s not the state, it is the union and the employers...Boy you people are idiots

The dummy was building a strawman... PratchettFan knows nobody said that.

 

[The Infidel]

Has anyone said people don't have a right to join a union if they chose to?

Approximately one zillion rightwing posters on USMB have said that public sector unions should be abolished, outlawed, or otherwise prevented in some manner.

So the answer is 'yes'.

is a zillion more that an billion Dr Evil??

 

[SniperFire]

Yes everyone should have the right to choose to join a union. Not sure what the point is.

I agree everyone should have the right to join a union - do you know, Walmart's CEO -takes- 717 times more then the average non-union worker who -makes- on average $8.81/hr? (I wonder who negotiated that contract?)


Join the union or-----or in MI you can now 'take' all the services of union representation without 'make-ing' the payment for union services -- It's like in MI, you think you can now eat lunch but-----but for some weird reason you and other free riders expect your fellow lunch counter sitters to pick up their own tab and-----and YOUR tab too, WTF? -takers-pewsh!-


Republicans are a strange breed, they support free riders whether it be receiving union benefits for free, or receiving healthcare without paying for their fair share of the cost, or red states getting back more federal dollars than they put in, and so on, and so on, and so... while simultaneously whining about... about damn near everything.
.

That is the union's problem. If they make their services attractive enough for employees to join, they won't have a 'free rider' problem.

For example, perhaps unions should rethink spending all of that money to buy Democrat politicians. Not everyone who works in a union supports that.

Please support freedom of choice.

 

[PratchettFan]

There is not a single state in this country which requires you join a union.

It’s not the state, it is the union and the employers...Boy you people are idiots

The dummy was building a strawman... PratchettFan knows nobody said that.

No, but I am not surprised you would hide behind that argument. When I was in school I went looking for a job. I was offered one but it required I join a union. I turned it down because I don't want to join a union. I had the right to not join and the employer had the right to run their business how they saw fit.

You are supporting the idea that the government should step in and tell businesses what kind of labor agreements they can negotiate and how they will run their hiring practices. Explain to me how that is not socialism.

 

[Katzndogz]

There should be a right to join a union. And a right not to join a union and if you don't join a union, you shouldn't have to pay union dues.

Should you have a right to a union job at an employer who has agreed to a union contract if you don't pay union dues?

(btw, nobody here on the right cares, but there is a difference between union dues and agency fees; I'm using the term union dues because the simpletons on the right are ineducable)

If a non union employee is working at that job, it's not a union job is it? The unions were taking money right out of the paychecks of non union workers. Without their consent. That's stealing. No unions should not have that right. Then, if that's not bad enough, the unions used that money to support politicians that the employees didn't themselves support. The unions cut their own throats by marrying the politicians. If unions were prohibited from supporting politicians this would never have happened. If unions represented union members rather than their own little unholy alliances, the unions would still be relevant.

 

[The Infidel]

I suspect the first thing you will see in a new Right to Work state is the rapid attrition of union members in the companies that pushed for the law. They can always find a reason for a layoff, reduction in force, or a 'position no longer needed'. That is the whole reason for the law. It is to bust unions, and destroy the workers bargaining position.

Wow you are ill informed... that or very dishonest.

What is wrong with a corporation deciding how many employees they need or deciding to consolidate a job.

I have worked my entire life w/o joining a union, and I have done just fine for myself.

In Texas I have the right to work anywhere I want, as long as I am qualified for the job.

 

[tyroneweaver]

the op obviously extolling the virtues of the right to join a union. Which in turn leads us to....

 

[PratchettFan]

There should be a right to join a union. And a right not to join a union and if you don't join a union, you shouldn't have to pay union dues.

Should you have a right to a union job at an employer who has agreed to a union contract if you don't pay union dues?

(btw, nobody here on the right cares, but there is a difference between union dues and agency fees; I'm using the term union dues because the simpletons on the right are ineducable)

If a non union employee is working at that job, it's not a union job is it? The unions were taking money right out of the paychecks of non union workers. Without their consent. That's stealing. No unions should not have that right. Then, if that's not bad enough, the unions used that money to support politicians that the employees didn't themselves support. The unions cut their own throats by marrying the politicians. If unions were prohibited from supporting politicians this would never have happened. If unions represented union members rather than their own little unholy alliances, the unions would still be relevant.

Without their consent? They joined the union, they gave their consent. You just believe they made the wrong decision and think the government should step in to protect them from themselves. I ask again, how is that not socialism?

 

[SniperFire]

I suspect the first thing you will see in a new Right to Work state is the rapid attrition of union members in the companies that pushed for the law. They can always find a reason for a layoff, reduction in force, or a 'position no longer needed'. That is the whole reason for the law. It is to bust unions, and destroy the workers bargaining position.

Wow you are ill informed... that or very dishonest.

What is wrong with a corporation deciding how many employees they need or deciding to consolidate a job.

I have worked my entire life w/o joining a union, and I have done just fine for myself.

In Texas I have the right to work anywhere I want, as long as I am qualified for the job.

With this poster, this in not mutually exclusive.


LOL

 

[WillowTree]

.
Reagan: "the most elemental human rights—the right to belong to a free trade union...

​

Ronald Reagan-Address to the Nation on Christmas and the Situation in Poland (December 23, 1981) - YouTube


Ronald Reagan-Address to the Nation on Christmas and the Situation in Poland (December 23, 1981) - YouTube


President Reagan discusses the tragic events that have occurred in Poland at the hands of the Polish government, which he suspects is influenced by the Soviet Union. He warns the Polish government of severe consequences if they should continue to disregard the human rights of its citizens.

.

You still have the right to join a union, and now people have the right NOT to join a union, and that's just busting yer chops. Makes me happy that you have busted chops. And remember when you cite Reagan, he's the dude that fired the entire union of ATC.. hilarious huh?

 

[The Infidel]

It’s not the state, it is the union and the employers...Boy you people are idiots

The dummy was building a strawman... PratchettFan knows nobody said that.

No, but I am not surprised you would hide behind that argument. When I was in school I went looking for a job. I was offered one but it required I join a union. I turned it down because I don't want to join a union. I had the right to not join and the employer had the right to run their business how they saw fit.

You are supporting the idea that the government should step in and tell businesses what kind of labor agreements they can negotiate and how they will run their hiring practices. Explain to me how that is not socialism.

You need to educate yourself on the right to work states... you dont realize it, but you support "right to work".

Texas has unions as well.... and it is a "right to work" state.

Thanks for trying.

 

[The Infidel]

.
Reagan: "the most elemental human rights—the right to belong to a free trade union...

​

Ronald Reagan-Address to the Nation on Christmas and the Situation in Poland (December 23, 1981) - YouTube


Ronald Reagan-Address to the Nation on Christmas and the Situation in Poland (December 23, 1981) - YouTube


President Reagan discusses the tragic events that have occurred in Poland at the hands of the Polish government, which he suspects is influenced by the Soviet Union. He warns the Polish government of severe consequences if they should continue to disregard the human rights of its citizens.

.

You still have the right to join a union, and now people have the right NOT to join a union, and that's just busting yer chops. Makes me happy that you have busted chops. And remember when you cite Reagan, he's the dude that fired the entire union of ATC.. hilarious huh?

Can you imagine the hysteria that would have ensued if Obama lost the election???

I mean look at them in Michigan...

 

[NYcarbineer]

Has anyone said people don't have a right to join a union if they chose to?

Approximately one zillion rightwing posters on USMB have said that public sector unions should be abolished, outlawed, or otherwise prevented in some manner.

So the answer is 'yes'.

is a zillion more that an billion Dr Evil??

I was referring to people like you, who believe that public sector unions should be banned.

 

[WillowTree]

Has anyone said people don't have a right to join a union if they chose to?

Approximately one zillion rightwing posters on USMB have said that public sector unions should be abolished, outlawed, or otherwise prevented in some manner.

So the answer is 'yes'.

What most of us have said is we can't afford them" any longer, they need to pay more on their pensions and healtcare to lessen the load on the taxpayer.

 

[FA_Q2]

Are you lying or are you uninformed?

The people of Michigan have always had the right NOT to be forced to join a union.

What percentage of workers innMichigan are, in fact, union members? Was this number 100% before their butthurt GOP legislators fucked them?

If it was a union shop you had to be in the union to work there , if there was no union of course you wouldn't have to be in a union...moron

True. But the decision as to whether or not to be a union shop was not made by the union, it was made by the business. There was no law requiring the business be a union shop. So now the government is telling the business how they must operate.

I notice in your tag line you have a quote from Reagan about a limited government. How does this fit in with that quote?

No, that is actually false. Such decisions are not simply made by the business because the workers have the right to unionize. That right is protected by laws and businesses HAVE to respect that right. Such negotiations are NOT one sided. The business simply does not decide to be a closed shop. The union demands that as a condition and the businesses usually have to bend.

In that regard, the unions have special considerations under the law that gives them this power. Right to work states have simply went the other direction here. No longer does the union have the ability to demand that all future workers need to pay or join the union. I can guarantee that NO business has decided to be a closed shop because they want to. They do that because it is part of the agreement that the government has coerced them into with union legal protection.

With that said, the unions (really the workers) NEED those protections or companies would threaten and fire people when they unionized BUT that should not allow those agreements to force future workers into the contracts if they choose not to participate.


So far, not one person that is against right to work can give me a real reason that you should be forced to pay an entity that you do not want to be a part of. There is no other way to express this than servitude. It is not socialism to reign BACK some of the legal protections that unions have garnered over the years. Indeed, it needs to happen.

 

[blackhawk]

Reagan was an actor.

He didn't have his own thoughts; he just read what his handlers put in front of him and made it sound convincing.

Huh not unlike the teleprompter master we have in the White house now.

 

[SniperFire]

Has anyone said people don't have a right to join a union if they chose to?

Approximately one zillion rightwing posters on USMB have said that public sector unions should be abolished, outlawed, or otherwise prevented in some manner.

So the answer is 'yes'.

What most of us have said is we can't afford them" any longer, they need to pay more on their pensions and healtcare to lessen the load on the taxpayer.

Personally, I believe unions are great in that we have the Constitutional right to assemble.

What went wrong is that leftist passed laws which forced business owners to recognize and negotiate with such groups. Fuck that.

Businesses hire individuals, and the laws should reflect this.

 

[NYcarbineer]

There should be a right to join a union. And a right not to join a union and if you don't join a union, you shouldn't have to pay union dues.

Should you have a right to a union job at an employer who has agreed to a union contract if you don't pay union dues?

(btw, nobody here on the right cares, but there is a difference between union dues and agency fees; I'm using the term union dues because the simpletons on the right are ineducable)

If a non union employee is working at that job, it's not a union job is it? The unions were taking money right out of the paychecks of non union workers. Without their consent. That's stealing. No unions should not have that right. Then, if that's not bad enough, the unions used that money to support politicians that the employees didn't themselves support. The unions cut their own throats by marrying the politicians. If unions were prohibited from supporting politicians this would never have happened. If unions represented union members rather than their own little unholy alliances, the unions would still be relevant.

The employee consents when he takes the job. No one is forced to work at a union shop.

 

[SniperFire]

Should you have a right to a union job at an employer who has agreed to a union contract if you don't pay union dues?

(btw, nobody here on the right cares, but there is a difference between union dues and agency fees; I'm using the term union dues because the simpletons on the right are ineducable)

If a non union employee is working at that job, it's not a union job is it? The unions were taking money right out of the paychecks of non union workers. Without their consent. That's stealing. No unions should not have that right. Then, if that's not bad enough, the unions used that money to support politicians that the employees didn't themselves support. The unions cut their own throats by marrying the politicians. If unions were prohibited from supporting politicians this would never have happened. If unions represented union members rather than their own little unholy alliances, the unions would still be relevant.

The employee consents when he takes the job. No one is forced to work at a union shop.

Not any longer.

 

[FA_Q2]

Should you have a right to a union job at an employer who has agreed to a union contract if you don't pay union dues?

(btw, nobody here on the right cares, but there is a difference between union dues and agency fees; I'm using the term union dues because the simpletons on the right are ineducable)

If a non union employee is working at that job, it's not a union job is it? The unions were taking money right out of the paychecks of non union workers. Without their consent. That's stealing. No unions should not have that right. Then, if that's not bad enough, the unions used that money to support politicians that the employees didn't themselves support. The unions cut their own throats by marrying the politicians. If unions were prohibited from supporting politicians this would never have happened. If unions represented union members rather than their own little unholy alliances, the unions would still be relevant.

The employee consents when he takes the job. No one is forced to work at a union shop.

So now the left is using the - go work somewhere else - excuse.

LOL, never thought I'd see the day.

Psssst. Some career field do not even have that option and even others are stuck when the company becomes union. I guess they should be forced to quit or join because rights and well, ya that's what were calling a right these days.