Reid Still Looking to Introduce Forced Unionizing Bill

[Avatar4321]

Where is all this legislation coming from? You can't possibly tell me that since the November elections legislators have come up with so much legislation on their own. I mean heck some of this legislation is 2000+ pages. Where is it coming from?

Same place as usual.
Soros

Yes, the Master Jew strikes again

Well, could you provided another source of all these bills? I mean seriously, you don't get this many bills in a lame duck session, especially once too long to read, out of nowhere.

 

[JBeukema]

give me reasons this is a bad bill?

Unions are already too corrupt.
Unions already have too much power in politics.
Unions have too much power and control over their members lives and ours because of what they effect.
Unionism is not compatible with Federalism, Republican Government, and the Free Market.
Unions are not necessary, labor laws can easily replace the little good that Unions do without the Thuggery, and corruption.
Every Union benefit is paid for by the rest of us in one form or another.
Unionism protects incompetence and mediocrity.
Unions corrupt and contaminate the ranks of Government, Comrade. You are too heavy a parasite , have outgrown the host, and need to go.

Unions are Corporations in their own right who's product is human labour and shouldn't be treated by the left with any less distain as they have for any other big corporation.

And therin lies the contradiction of the left and those that favour UNIONS.

Dis`tain´
v. t.1.To tinge with a different color from the natural or proper one; to stain; to discolor; to sully; to tarnish; to defile; - used chiefly in poetry.[imp. & p. p. Distained ; p. pr. & vb. n. Distaining.]

 

[JBeukema]

Same place as usual.
Soros

Yes, the Master Jew strikes again

Well, could you provided another source of all these bills? I mean seriously, you don't get this many bills in a lame duck session, especially once too long to read, out of nowhere.

Yep... can't be unions and corporations writing the bills.... it must be the Jews!

Sieg Heil! Vote for Fuhrer Beck!

 

[Avatar4321]

Yes, the Master Jew strikes again

Well, could you provided another source of all these bills? I mean seriously, you don't get this many bills in a lame duck session, especially once too long to read, out of nowhere.

Yep... can't be unions and corporations writing the bills.... it must be the Jews!

Sieg Heil! Vote for Fuhrer Beck!

I hardly consider Soros a Jew. An Athiestic revolutionary is more like it.

So its the Unions and the Corporations. Id say that's a good answer. Don't know if it's true in the case of these bills.

 

[The T]

Well, could you provided another source of all these bills? I mean seriously, you don't get this many bills in a lame duck session, especially once too long to read, out of nowhere.

Yep... can't be unions and corporations writing the bills.... it must be the Jews!

Sieg Heil! Vote for Fuhrer Beck!

I hardly consider Soros a Jew. An Athiestic revolutionary is more like it.

So its the Unions and the Corporations. Id say that's a good answer. Don't know if it's true in the case of these bills.

And one that worked with Nazi's against Humanity.

 

[JBeukema]

Well, could you provided another source of all these bills? I mean seriously, you don't get this many bills in a lame duck session, especially once too long to read, out of nowhere.

Yep... can't be unions and corporations writing the bills.... it must be the Jews!

Sieg Heil! Vote for Fuhrer Beck!

I hardly consider Soros a Jew. An Athiestic revolutionary is more like it.

So its the Unions and the Corporations. Id say that's a good answer. Don't know if it's true in the case of these bills.

yep, it must be the Master Jew who controls the media and the government


we must stop this jewish conspiracy... but how...? If only we could concentrate them all in some sort of camp, right? And all the communists, too! And the poor you already said you wish would die already. And maybe the cripples, the mexicans, the blacks, and the roma? And the unions!

 

[JBeukema]

Yep... can't be unions and corporations writing the bills.... it must be the Jews!

Sieg Heil! Vote for Fuhrer Beck!

I hardly consider Soros a Jew. An Athiestic revolutionary is more like it.

So its the Unions and the Corporations. Id say that's a good answer. Don't know if it's true in the case of these bills.

And one that worked with Nazi's against Humanity.

Even the holocaust was a Jewish conspiracy- he was eliminating the competition!

 

[The Rabbi]

Unions are archaic relics that exist only because gov't laws support and defend them. In any reasonable system they would have died out a long time ago, as they have in most private industries. But they exist hand in claw with Democrats and are one of the few remaining sources of power for the Dims.
No surprise Reid would try to ram this down everyone's throat. Of course in his case he owes his seat to the illegal acts of casino union workers and their voter fraud.

 

[JBeukema]

exist only because gov't laws support and defend them

Which explains, of course, how they formed and flourished despite FBI assassinations of union leaders

 

[The Rabbi]

exist only because gov't laws support and defend them

Which explains, of course, how they formed and flourished despite FBI assassinations of union leaders

What does formation have to do with continued existence??
Ted Kennedy existed despite efforts by Jqck Daniels and Jim Beam to destroy him.

 

[JBeukema]

What is jqck daniels?

I told you to stop buying liquor from your fellow jews- they're taking advantage of your stupidity, man

 

[thereisnospoon]

hmmm right wing news............ obviously a legitimate news souce

and the actual article you posted goes on to say the following:

"The Senate may soon consider a bill that would force states to allow for the unionization of public employees."

so basically all this is going is allowing public employees to unionize. (not that im for unions at all) but i dont see how the forces people to join a union? also labor unions do have a national presence with local chapters. so im not sure how this takes away from local government negotiations?

Pretty simple. For example, in both North and South Carolina public employees MAY become members of labor organizations. However, in those states, public employees are prohibited from collectively bargaining for wages and/or benefits.
Reid's bill would usurp State" Rights by enacting federal law which would FORCE states to allow public employees to collectively bargain.
This is Unconstitutional on two fronts. One it Violates the 10th Amendment and Two, it violates the 14th Amendment which guarantees equal protection under the law,. The latter applies because the Reid bill does not cover ALL workers.
My thinking is this goes nowhere. Reid's bill places draconian burdens on states and municipalities in that the Bill is unfunded. And as every one knows public sector employees covered by unions draw very lucrative, read high tax burden, wages.
Even if this passes, the bill would be held up by multiple court challenges. Once the new Congress convenes the law would no doubt be gutted.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Yeah thats what , we need a thugocracy based on corruption and crony-ism.
I can see tax collectors clubbing workers at the banks of friday afternoons.

 

[The T]

exist only because gov't laws support and defend them

Which explains, of course, how they formed and flourished despite FBI assassinations of union leaders

What does formation have to do with continued existence??
Ted Kennedy existed despite efforts by Jqck Daniels and Jim Beam to destroy him.

Even they and Teddys' habits got to him. He paid the price of drinking at their trough.

 

[Common Sense]

hmmm right wing news............ obviously a legitimate news souce

and the actual article you posted goes on to say the following:

"The Senate may soon consider a bill that would force states to allow for the unionization of public employees."

so basically all this is going is allowing public employees to unionize. (not that im for unions at all) but i dont see how the forces people to join a union? also labor unions do have a national presence with local chapters. so im not sure how this takes away from local government negotiations?

Pretty simple. For example, in both North and South Carolina public employees MAY become members of labor organizations. However, in those states, public employees are prohibited from collectively bargaining for wages and/or benefits.
Reid's bill would usurp State" Rights by enacting federal law which would FORCE states to allow public employees to collectively bargain.
This is Unconstitutional on two fronts. One it Violates the 10th Amendment and Two, it violates the 14th Amendment which guarantees equal protection under the law,. The latter applies because the Reid bill does not cover ALL workers.
My thinking is this goes nowhere. Reid's bill places draconian burdens on states and municipalities in that the Bill is unfunded. And as every one knows public sector employees covered by unions draw very lucrative, read high tax burden, wages.
Even if this passes, the bill would be held up by multiple court challenges. Once the new Congress convenes the law would no doubt be gutted.

well i may agree with you that unions arent necessarily a good things, i fail to see how this violated the 10th and 14th amendments. the federal government always has precedent over the states. the 10th amendment says that anything the fed doesnt govern or regulate is left to the states, this would just simply make the federal law supersede the state law. (this happens all the time and is constitutional under the supremacy clause of the constitution)

im not sure how your argument of the 14th amendment is relative, because this federal law would cover all workers. allowing them to collectively bargain with their local governments.

i do understand that maybe some public services employees (police and fire) do get left out to dry at times, and this was Reid's answer on how to try and help them. while the intent behind it is notable, it may need some revisions.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

hmmm right wing news............ obviously a legitimate news souce

and the actual article you posted goes on to say the following:

"The Senate may soon consider a bill that would force states to allow for the unionization of public employees."

so basically all this is going is allowing public employees to unionize. (not that im for unions at all) but i dont see how the forces people to join a union? also labor unions do have a national presence with local chapters. so im not sure how this takes away from local government negotiations?

Pretty simple. For example, in both North and South Carolina public employees MAY become members of labor organizations. However, in those states, public employees are prohibited from collectively bargaining for wages and/or benefits.
Reid's bill would usurp State" Rights by enacting federal law which would FORCE states to allow public employees to collectively bargain.
This is Unconstitutional on two fronts. One it Violates the 10th Amendment and Two, it violates the 14th Amendment which guarantees equal protection under the law,. The latter applies because the Reid bill does not cover ALL workers.
My thinking is this goes nowhere. Reid's bill places draconian burdens on states and municipalities in that the Bill is unfunded. And as every one knows public sector employees covered by unions draw very lucrative, read high tax burden, wages.
Even if this passes, the bill would be held up by multiple court challenges. Once the new Congress convenes the law would no doubt be gutted.

well i may agree with you that unions arent necessarily a good things, i fail to see how this violated the 10th and 14th amendments. the federal government always has precedent over the states. the 10th amendment says that anything the fed doesnt govern or regulate is left to the states, this would just simply make the federal law supersede the state law. (this happens all the time and is constitutional under the supremacy clause of the constitution)

im not sure how your argument of the 14th amendment is relative, because this federal law would cover all workers. allowing them to collectively bargain with their local governments.

i do understand that maybe some public services employees (police and fire) do get left out to dry at times, and this was Reid's answer on how to try and help them. while the intent behind it is notable, it may need some revisions.

 

[hortysir]

Yes, the Master Jew strikes again

Well, could you provided another source of all these bills? I mean seriously, you don't get this many bills in a lame duck session, especially once too long to read, out of nowhere.

Yep... can't be unions and corporations writing the bills.... it must be the Jews!

Sieg Heil! Vote for Fuhrer Beck!

I have no clue about Soros' faith.
Couldn't give a shit less if he's a Jew or a Buddhist.

But yes it's Unions, Corporations, and any number of Progressive finger-puppet groups writing these bills.
Remember? Our Congress couldn't even take the time to READ the fucking things.
What in this world makes you think they WROTE them??

 

[Intense]

Unions are not necessary, labor laws can easily replace the little good that Unions do without the Thuggery, and corruption.

I disagree with this one. Govt is open to lobby groups. Most lobbyists are fairly rich and are usually employers. Remember it was the thuggery and bullying tactics of employers that made unions necessary in the first place

Sometimes I get a tiny bit carried away.

Personally, I vote to have them taken completely out of Government and De-clawed.
A tamer version, maybe....Nah....

We have the power through the Law, should we learn to take the responsibility seriously, be it Wages, Insurance, Benefits, Arbitrary Firing. Government should be able to come up with fair minded Laws and protections. With the Unions out of the equation, if reason, and I emphasize Reason being applied, we should come up with good minimum standards.

 

[Intense]

hmmm right wing news............ obviously a legitimate news souce

and the actual article you posted goes on to say the following:

"The Senate may soon consider a bill that would force states to allow for the unionization of public employees."

so basically all this is going is allowing public employees to unionize. (not that im for unions at all) but i dont see how the forces people to join a union? also labor unions do have a national presence with local chapters. so im not sure how this takes away from local government negotiations?

Pretty simple. For example, in both North and South Carolina public employees MAY become members of labor organizations. However, in those states, public employees are prohibited from collectively bargaining for wages and/or benefits.
Reid's bill would usurp State" Rights by enacting federal law which would FORCE states to allow public employees to collectively bargain.
This is Unconstitutional on two fronts. One it Violates the 10th Amendment and Two, it violates the 14th Amendment which guarantees equal protection under the law,. The latter applies because the Reid bill does not cover ALL workers.
My thinking is this goes nowhere. Reid's bill places draconian burdens on states and municipalities in that the Bill is unfunded. And as every one knows public sector employees covered by unions draw very lucrative, read high tax burden, wages.
Even if this passes, the bill would be held up by multiple court challenges. Once the new Congress convenes the law would no doubt be gutted.

That's the point. The Law that covers Union's could easily cover All Workers.