Right To Work...

[jc456]

]Wages are not handed out based on your value. They are offered, based on what a company thinks you will settle for, and are negotiated, based on what you can convince the company you might be able to get from somewhere else.

Of course they are paid on "value." Have you ever had a job before? My career is in management and management consulting, I've hired, managed and fired my entire life and you are full of shit, you have no idea what you are talking about.

We pay to get the most value out of the job. You idiot leftists fundamentally don't understand business. Our priority is not lower cost, it's ... wait for it ... profit.

Profit = revenue - cost.

"Value" is your contribution to profit.

We don't hire based only on cost, we hire to maximize profit. The negotiating room is based on the profit question. What should I pay to maximize profit? We pay more for employees who bring in revenue, we pay more for employees who will help us serve and keep our customers, we pay more for employees who reduce defects. We don't underpay because that demotivates good employees.

The leftist view that employees are socket wrenches and one is interchangeable with another and it doesn't matter what we pay so we simply turn the screws to make it as little as possible is just your Marxist mental masturbation with no connection to reality

That you don't give a shit about your job or your employer, you do as little as possible and you have a bad attitude is why your value is low and why your pay is low

He's correct in a union job, there are no values. Everyone is equal whether they work well or not. They demoralize values!

 

[jc456]

Unions destroy prosperity!

"Prosperity Through Lower Wages!"

Once again, gin up that crack head base by telling the lie of lower wages ..........................

You have yet to prove ANYONE GETS LOWER WAGES, the unions just don't get to extort money or keep the better paying jobs .......................

They fear right to work!

 

[warf]

Something wingnuts don't understand is that man is a social animal.
Progress comes through cooperative activity. Unions negotiate with the combined strength of all the workers.

But those of you who picture yourselves as rugged individuals who rise to the top through your own talents are blinded by your own bullshit and easily divided and conquered.

You bring down the rest of society. But secure in your mythology you'll probably not realize it until it's too late.

You are an angry individual. Must be you are not happy with having to pay dues and go along and have lazy good for nothings making the same money as you doing very little work and still getting credit.

How did you come up with that?

I don't live in a right to work state. I don't work with scabs.

 

[dblack]

Something wingnuts don't understand is that man is a social animal.
Progress comes through cooperative activity. Unions negotiate with the combined strength of all the workers.

But those of you who picture yourselves as rugged individuals who rise to the top through your own talents are blinded by your own bullshit and easily divided and conquered.

You bring down the rest of society. But secure in your mythology you'll probably not realize it until it's too late.

You are an angry individual. Must be you are not happy with having to pay dues and go along and have lazy good for nothings making the same money as you doing very little work and still getting credit.

How did you come up with that?

I don't live in a right to work state. I don't work with scabs.

You know, I worked unions for six years, and nothing disgusted me more than hearing my union "brothers" referring to non-union workers as "scabs' - especially when most of the "scabs" would have loved to be in the union but couldn't get in because they didn't know the right people.

 

[jc456]

Wages are not handed out based on your value. They are offered, based on what a company thinks you will settle for, and are negotiated, based on what you can convince the company you might be able to get from somewhere else.

Of course they are paid on "value." Have you ever had a job before? My career is in management and management consulting, I've hired, managed and fired my entire life and you are full of shit, you have no idea what you are talking about.

I know exactly what I'm talking about. You're just too much of a nitwit to understand. Jesus Hell, put down the crack pipe for a minute and stop flying off in a blind rage. Everything I have said is true. I draw it out to attention to highlight the fact that the burden of improving workers wages must be upon the individual to assertively pursue the best wages they can possibly achieve, and that the view that employers will, or ought to, simply hand over the better wages is foolish and unproductive.

The point is for an individual to take responsibility for their own wages and to understand how and why the very best and most capable advocate in the world for an individual's improving wages is him/her self.

We pay to get the most value out of the job. You idiot leftists fundamentally don't understand business. Our priority is not lower cost, it's ... wait for it ... profit.

Profit = revenue - cost.

So let me get this straight....you pay for value, your priority is profit, profit is what's left after you subtract cost....yet lowering cost is not a priority?

Okay, now I know that you're full of shit. You haven't managed anything a day in your life. You just contradicted yourself! Minimizing costs is fundamentally an element of profit. If you can generate the same revenue with 10% less costs, then that creates more profit. Duh!

"Value" is your contribution to profit.

This is ridiculously overly simplified, and if your career claims are true (as vague as they are) then you ought to already know that. At this point, I find it very difficult to believe your claims when you make such absurdly overly simplified statements like this.

First of all, an individual's "contribution" to profit is usually difficult to ascertain in the first place. What dollar figure can you put on a janitor's contribution to profit? That's next to impossible to actually assign a hard value to. Second, how can you identify the precise contribution to profit of an individual who does not yet work for you? You can't. At best, you can imagine a rough estimate of how well they will be able to do their job, based on their past experience and your personal interactions with them during the interviewing process.

But let's imagine for a moment that by some form of slut magic a precise figure can be attached to my "contribution." Let's say that figure is determined to be $500,000 on the year. What is my "value"? According to you, my value is $500,000. Should that be my salary for the year?

Any employer who is going to do that is a damned fool and won't be in business very long. Anyone who really does have the (albeit vague) experience that you claim (and insinuate) you have would not be such a damned fool (unless you simply have the IQ of downs baby with brain damage). Even if I can accurately determine an individual's "contribution" to profit is $500,000 there's no way in hell I'm going to pay them that much money. Because if I do, there's no profit left in the first place! Except for them. But as an employer, I get nothing. What I'm going to pay that person is as little as I can get away with. Always. If I can get that $500,000 from a $30,000 a year employee, then that's what I'm going to pay. If the lowest I can get that $500,000 a year is $90,000, then that's what I'll have to pay. On the other hand, if I can get $600,000 a year for someone at $100,000, then I'll take option B.

We don't hire based only on cost, we hire to maximize profit.

And the Captain Obvious award of the day goes to Kaz!

I never said that hires are made based only on costs. Congratulations tearing down that straw man.

The negotiating room is based on the profit question. What should I pay to maximize profit? We pay more for employees who bring in revenue, we pay more for employees who will help us serve and keep our customers, we pay more for employees who reduce defects.

And? You just admitted that job offers include negotiating room. No employer is going to open the discussion by offering the maximum, unless they have a very good reason for believing that you aren't going to be accept for anything less. So thanks for conceding my point.

We don't underpay because that demotivates good employees.

That's not necessarily true. Some employers do under pay what their employees can easily get elsewhere. But typically it's because the employee's value has not be fairly assessed, or because the employee has settled for a long time at a lower rate while their experience and skill has increased over time, but the employee has not made any attempt to seek improved pay.

The leftist view that employees are socket wrenches and one is interchangeable with another and it doesn't matter what we pay so we simply turn the screws to make it as little as possible is just your Marxist mental masturbation with no connection to reality

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Stop inserting absurd tangents.

That you don't give a shit about your job or your employer, you do as little as possible and you have a bad attitude is why your value is low and why your pay is low

I do what? You're a damned fool. I'm damned good at my job. Which is exactly why I get paid well for it. It's why I am being paid 12% more than what the company originally offered me. It's the reason why I had several job offers at the time, and why the original offer I got from my current employer was the max of the range they originally anticipated for my position. According to you, that's impossible. The company had a range, anything above that range wouldn't maximize profit, so the counter I made should have been rejected. So why did they meet my requests? Because they wanted the best, and they know that if you want the best you have to pay for the best. I convinced them that there was a good chance I could get the pay I was asking for somewhere else, so they expanded their pay range in order to secure me. So I got the best pay and the best position, they got the best candidate. The second company that was just an okay option got an okay candidate, the third company that wanted to hold fast and hoped to lowball me and work me to death all at the same time ended up with a lowball quality warm body.

But a janitor is a necessity and keeping one's job without a union means one has to add value to keep the job. That sir is the weight of value.

 

[jc456]

T

Something wingnuts don't understand is that man is a social animal.
Progress comes through cooperative activity. Unions negotiate with the combined strength of all the workers.

But those of you who picture yourselves as rugged individuals who rise to the top through your own talents are blinded by your own bullshit and easily divided and conquered.

You bring down the rest of society. But secure in your mythology you'll probably not realize it until it's too late.

You are an angry individual. Must be you are not happy with having to pay dues and go along and have lazy good for nothings making the same money as you doing very little work and still getting credit.

How did you come up with that?

I don't live in a right to work state. I don't work with scabs.

That statement makes you worse than a scab!

 

[kaz]

the burden of improving workers wages must be upon the individual to assertively pursue the best wages they can possibly achieve, and that the view that employers will, or ought to, simply hand over the better wages is foolish and unproductive.

That isn't how relationships work. Relationships are mutually beneficial agreements. That means that both workers and management have to get to the right price. Your view that it's just on the employee is just wrong. Just like if you said it was all on the employer would be wrong. I want motivated employees, it's a two way street. A few examples from my own business:

1) My senior production guy isn't leaving. He's well compensated for what he does. We both know that. he also likes it here. I give him small, infrequent raises. He's fine with that, he knows he makes the market max. However, I do pay him regular bonuses to keep him motivated. They aren't huge, but they are something and they are regular. He is constantly fixing equipment himself saving the company a lot of money. He's already motivated and he would be anyway, but that extra bit keeps him constantly going the extra mile and he knows that he's appreciated.

2) I have a graphic designer who has always been talented. He's in his 30s and went to an OK school. He has an OK background. His manager and I kept telling him in review after review that he's very talented and he has a good attitude, everyone likes working with him. But he is capable of so much more, we felt like he was mailing it in. He was getting tiny raises and no bonuses. He wanted more pay, we said we were good with paying more, but he has to start earning it. About a year and a half ago, he just flipped a switch. He started being the last to leave instead of the first, he learned new tools, his productivity skyrocketed. He's keeping it up, suddenly his raises got larger and he gets regular bonuses. We are going into web as a new initiative and he's our main web designer.

3) I had two customer service people who sucked. They had bad attitudes with employees, they gave customers whatever they asked for whether it was reasonable or not. After several reviews, I cut their hours in half and as they were now part time employees I eliminated their benefits. When they didn't improve, I fired them both the same day. Their co-workers said wow, the job got easier with them both gone

4) It's the job of customer service people to provide quotes for customers who contact the business, I don't pay them commissions like sales people. One customer service person brought a customer in though they knew from a prior job and they stuck with us. I paid them a bonus. Then they and two other customer service people started bringing in other occasional customers from outside. One got a menu order from a restaurant they ate in. I kept paying them bonuses, they keep looking for new customers to bring in.

5) I bought a promo business, folded it into my business and hired the prior owner. She had all the relationships and is a natural salesman. I agreed to minimum pay, which was supposed to be temporary, while she built up the customer base. Two years later she hadn't built up sales to earn what she was paid with commissions. She was dogging it. I put her on a plan that her pay would converge to her earnings over the next 18 months. She was welcome to find another job, but I wasn't paying her what she wasn't earning. She stopped screwing around and rebuilt her sales to earn her salary and more.

The point is profit. When you say determining value isn't easy, no shit Dick Tracy. Why are most people not in management? When you say some employers only care about cost, again, no shit. You can find people bad at everything, they are the ones that lose.

Successful companies treat their employees as partners. We actually do care what we pay them. But overpaying them is bad business, as is demotivating them with poor pay structures or low pay. The idea that it's the employee versus the company for pay is just wrong. You either are a bad manager or work for bad managers if you don't know that

 

[jc456]

Something wingnuts don't understand is that man is a social animal.
Progress comes through cooperative activity. Unions negotiate with the combined strength of all the workers.

But those of you who picture yourselves as rugged individuals who rise to the top through your own talents are blinded by your own bullshit and easily divided and conquered.

You bring down the rest of society. But secure in your mythology you'll probably not realize it until it's too late.

You are an angry individual. Must be you are not happy with having to pay dues and go along and have lazy good for nothings making the same money as you doing very little work and still getting credit.

How did you come up with that?

I don't live in a right to work state. I don't work with scabs.

Correct, you work with people with no motivation to improve, and that is what makes you angry. Your Union brethren equal pay for non equal work. It's very funny

 

[jc456]

Something wingnuts don't understand is that man is a social animal.
Progress comes through cooperative activity. Unions negotiate with the combined strength of all the workers.

But those of you who picture yourselves as rugged individuals who rise to the top through your own talents are blinded by your own bullshit and easily divided and conquered.

You bring down the rest of society. But secure in your mythology you'll probably not realize it until it's too late.

You are an angry individual. Must be you are not happy with having to pay dues and go along and have lazy good for nothings making the same money as you doing very little work and still getting credit.

How did you come up with that?

I don't live in a right to work state. I don't work with scabs.

Correct, you work with people with no motivation to improve, and that is what makes you angry. Your Union brethren equal pay for non equal work. It's very funny

Btw, twenty Union workers to do a ten man job. That is the problem with unions. No motivational values

 

[The Professor]

.
Right To Work...
...for less

Studies Show Right-To-Work States Have Lower Wages And Benefits

Baker: It "Is Not True" That "In The Absence Of Right-To-Work Laws Workers Can Be Forced To Join A Union." In a February post for the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), economist Dean Baker wrote:
"Right to work" is a great name from the standpoint of proponents, just like the term "death tax" is effective for opponents of the estate tax, but it has nothing to do with the issue at hand. It is widely believed that in the absence of right-to-work laws workers can be forced to join a union. This is not true. Workers at any workplace always have the option as to whether or not to join a union. [CEPR, 2/28/11]

<snip>

...in addition to state-level economic conditions and cost-of-living differences across states. We find the following:
• Wages in right-to-work states are 3.2% lower than those in non-RTW states, after controlling for a full complement of individual demographic and socioeconomic variables as well as state macroeconomic indicators. Using the average wage in non-RTW states as the base ($22.11), the average full-time, full-year worker in an RTW state makes about $1,500 less annually than a similar worker in a non-RTW state.

• The rate of employer-sponsored health insurance (ESI) is 2.6 percentage points lower in RTW states compared with non-RTW states, after controlling for individual, job, and state-level characteristics. If workers in non-RTW states were to receive ESI at this lower rate, 2 million fewer workers nationally would be covered.

• The rate of employer-sponsored pensions is 4.8 percentage points lower in RTW states, using the full complement of control variables in our regression model. If workers in non-RTW states were to receive pensions at this lower rate, 3.8 million fewer workers nationally would have pensions. [EPI, 2/17/11]

How does your State's median income compare?
Find out here ☞ http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2015/03/13/personal-median-income-by-state-map/

.

So according to Baker: It "Is Not True" That "In The Absence Of Right-To-Work Laws Workers Can Be Forced To Join A Union." Well, Baker is wrong!

Contrary to what Baker claims, there are certain states in which employees can be required to join a union (pay dues), as a condition of employment. Such arrangements are called Union Shops. In Right-to-Work states, Union Shops are not allowed, meaning that union membership cannot be compulsory. Every state allows unions, but some states allow workers to choose whether or not to become members (pay dues).

The relevant law is the LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS-ACT (29 U.S.C.A. §§ 151 et seq.) also known as the Taft-Hartley Act. Here is what the Section 8(a)(3) of the Act says about Union Shops:

“It shall be an unfair labor practice for an employer—… (3) by discrimination in regard to hire or tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment to encourage or discourage membership in any labor organization: Provided, that nothing in this subchapter, or in any other statute of the United States, shall preclude an employer from making an agreement with a labor organization …to require as a condition of employment membership therein on or after the thirtieth day following the beginning of such employment or the effective date of such agreement … if such labor organization is the representative of the employees…”

While permitting Unions Shops, The Taft-Hartley Act also allowed individual states to ban the Union Shop by passing Right-to-Work Laws that prohibited employees from being required to join a union as a condition of receiving or retaining a job.

Closed Shop legal definition of Closed Shop

So, contrary to what Baker said, the truth is this: In The Absence Of Right-To-Work Laws Workers Can Be Forced To Join A Union.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Something wingnuts don't understand is that man is a social animal.
Progress comes through cooperative activity. Unions negotiate with the combined strength of all the workers.

But those of you who picture yourselves as rugged individuals who rise to the top through your own talents are blinded by your own bullshit and easily divided and conquered.

You bring down the rest of society. But secure in your mythology you'll probably not realize it until it's too late.

You are an angry individual. Must be you are not happy with having to pay dues and go along and have lazy good for nothings making the same money as you doing very little work and still getting credit.

How did you come up with that?

I don't live in a right to work state. I don't work with scabs.

You know, I worked unions for six years, and nothing disgusted me more than hearing my union "brothers" referring to non-union workers as "scabs' - especially when most of the "scabs" would have loved to be in the union but couldn't get in because they didn't know the right people.

most of the "scabs" would have loved to be in the union but couldn't get in because they didn't know the right people.

you have to be a legit worker not a strike breaker......

 

[warf]

T

Something wingnuts don't understand is that man is a social animal.
Progress comes through cooperative activity. Unions negotiate with the combined strength of all the workers.

But those of you who picture yourselves as rugged individuals who rise to the top through your own talents are blinded by your own bullshit and easily divided and conquered.

You bring down the rest of society. But secure in your mythology you'll probably not realize it until it's too late.

You are an angry individual. Must be you are not happy with having to pay dues and go along and have lazy good for nothings making the same money as you doing very little work and still getting credit.

How did you come up with that?

I don't live in a right to work state. I don't work with scabs.

That statement makes you worse than a scab!

That makes no sense.

 

[warf]

I don't know what kind of mickey mouse industries you guys think don't need worker protections that unions offer. I suspect that you know nothing about unions and get your ideas from urban myths.

My union, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, fits none of the scenarios you've created.

We offer contractors a skilled, hard working work force.
When a contractor calls the hall for an electrician and doesn't like the man sent he can refuse him for no given reason. Another will be sent until he's satisfied.
Anyone can be laid off at the discretion of the contractor. There is no seniority.
Our rule is 8 hours work for 8 hours pay.

It's in our best interest to keep our signatory contractors health and happy.

Many times I've had to clean up and finish jobs that scab contractors had screwed up.

That's the real story. All this anti-union talk is right wing fantasy.

And anyone can join our union. Providing he has good mechanical skills and we are not in a recession when there is not enough work.

 

[jc456]

I don't know what kind of mickey mouse industries you guys think don't need worker protections that unions offer. I suspect that you know nothing about unions and get your ideas from urban myths.

My union, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, fits none of the scenarios you've created.

We offer contractors a skilled, hard working work force.
When a contractor calls the hall for an electrician and doesn't like the man sent he can refuse him for no given reason. Another will be sent until he's satisfied.
Anyone can be laid off at the discretion of the contractor. There is no seniority.
Our rule is 8 hours work for 8 hours pay.

It's in our best interest to keep our signatory contractors health and happy.

Many times I've had to clean up and finish jobs that scab contractors had screwed up.

That's the real story. All this anti-union talk is right wing fantasy.

And anyone can join our union. Providing he has good mechanical skills and we are not in a recession when there is not enough work.

You Don't get it you are Union brain washed

 

[dblack]

Something wingnuts don't understand is that man is a social animal.
Progress comes through cooperative activity. Unions negotiate with the combined strength of all the workers.

But those of you who picture yourselves as rugged individuals who rise to the top through your own talents are blinded by your own bullshit and easily divided and conquered.

You bring down the rest of society. But secure in your mythology you'll probably not realize it until it's too late.

You are an angry individual. Must be you are not happy with having to pay dues and go along and have lazy good for nothings making the same money as you doing very little work and still getting credit.

How did you come up with that?

I don't live in a right to work state. I don't work with scabs.

You know, I worked unions for six years, and nothing disgusted me more than hearing my union "brothers" referring to non-union workers as "scabs' - especially when most of the "scabs" would have loved to be in the union but couldn't get in because they didn't know the right people.

most of the "scabs" would have loved to be in the union but couldn't get in because they didn't know the right people.

you have to be a legit worker not a strike breaker......

What? What do you mean?

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

My union, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, fits none of the scenarios you've created.
We offer contractors a skilled, hard working work force.

Like there are no skilled hard working private sector electricians ..............
The test for contractors are the same whether union or non union, what would make a union laborer any more competent or skilled than a private sector worker??
I know a journeyman electrician who is non union and has had some of his distribution panels shown in trade magazines. They taut how professional and clean his installations are ..............he's fucking non union and slapping the shit out of you union scum bags who are mostly unskilled hacks who need protectionism to keep a fucking job.

When a contractor calls the hall for an electrician and doesn't like the man sent he can refuse him for no given reason. Another will be sent until he's satisfied.

Same with private sector workers, the contractor has the final say on the job and can dismiss any laborer he deems unfit, whether for personal reasons such as the guy is a jerk or just because he don't like the way you smell.
So tow swings and two misses, let's continue ...................

Anyone can be laid off at the discretion of the contractor. There is no seniority.

Another irrelevant point, just as before GC is GOD on a job, he hires and fires at his digression.
Another fucking mute point ........

Our rule is 8 hours work for 8 hours pay.

So which private sector company is it that advertises we get 8 hrs' pay for anything less??
What a moronic fucking statement, are you trying to convey to us that for 8 hrs. of presence on the job the contractor will get 8 hrs of labor??
We all know that is a fucking lie, with set up time, smoke / coffee / pop breaks, bathroom breaks, etc it is not fucking possible ...........

It's in our best interest to keep our signatory contractors health and happy.

Once again name one business in private sector that same tenet would not apply to??

Many times I've had to clean up and finish jobs that scab contractors had screwed up.

There have been many private sector specialist that have had to be called in to fix fucking jobs unions screwed up !!

That's the real story. All this anti-union talk is right wing fantasy.

Those are your lines of shit that have nothing to do with right wing fantasy, just plain old reality which seems to be kicking your ass ..................

And anyone can join our union. Providing he has good mechanical skills and we are not in a recession when there is not enough work.

Well of course whether they have the aptitude or ability to do the job, you take their dues, send them out to do sub standard work and then fight to keep them from getting fired. You need their money in the form of union dues and will take any worthless piece of lazy shit as long as they contribute to the cause.

What part of, "When given the choice most workers are voting unions down and out"??

Come on back with some more of that ignorant union parrot bull shit rant ......................

 

[warf]

My union, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, fits none of the scenarios you've created.
We offer contractors a skilled, hard working work force.

Like there are no skilled hard working private sector electricians ..............
The test for contractors are the same whether union or non union, what would make a union laborer any more competent or skilled than a private sector worker??
I know a journeyman electrician who is non union and has had some of his distribution panels shown in trade magazines. They taut how professional and clean his installations are ..............he's fucking non union and slapping the shit out of you union scum bags who are mostly unskilled hacks who need protectionism to keep a fucking job.

When a contractor calls the hall for an electrician and doesn't like the man sent he can refuse him for no given reason. Another will be sent until he's satisfied.

Same with private sector workers, the contractor has the final say on the job and can dismiss any laborer he deems unfit, whether for personal reasons such as the guy is a jerk or just because he don't like the way you smell.
So tow swings and two misses, let's continue ...................

Anyone can be laid off at the discretion of the contractor. There is no seniority.

Another irrelevant point, just as before GC is GOD on a job, he hires and fires at his digression.
Another fucking mute point ........

Our rule is 8 hours work for 8 hours pay.

So which private sector company is it that advertises we get 8 hrs' pay for anything less??
What a moronic fucking statement, are you trying to convey to us that for 8 hrs. of presence on the job the contractor will get 8 hrs of labor??
We all know that is a fucking lie, with set up time, smoke / coffee / pop breaks, bathroom breaks, etc it is not fucking possible ...........

It's in our best interest to keep our signatory contractors health and happy.

Once again name one business in private sector that same tenet would not apply to??

Many times I've had to clean up and finish jobs that scab contractors had screwed up.

There have been many private sector specialist that have had to be called in to fix fucking jobs unions screwed up !!

That's the real story. All this anti-union talk is right wing fantasy.

Those are your lines of shit that have nothing to do with right wing fantasy, just plain old reality which seems to be kicking your ass ..................

And anyone can join our union. Providing he has good mechanical skills and we are not in a recession when there is not enough work.

Well of course whether they have the aptitude or ability to do the job, you take their dues, send them out to do sub standard work and then fight to keep them from getting fired. You need their money in the form of union dues and will take any worthless piece of lazy shit as long as they contribute to the cause.

What part of, "When given the choice most workers are voting unions down and out"??

Come on back with some more of that ignorant union parrot bull shit rant ......................

Stay healthy.

The 1% need useful tools like you.

 

[Ame®icano]

Let me ask this question:

In a Right to Work company, are the non-union workers compensated equally with the union workers?

Yep, by law they have to be ......................

They don't have to pay dues and there can be no concessions against them for refusal to pay union dues or join the union.................

I don't know what law you're referring to.

Union have strict rules for there workers, where those rules don't have to apply for non union workers. For instance, how overtime is distributed among workers. Union negotiate of maximum production output. Non union doesn't have to follow it.

Even union workers are not paid the same wage, for instance UAW Tier 1 and Tier 2 scheme.

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

My union, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, fits none of the scenarios you've created.
We offer contractors a skilled, hard working work force.

Like there are no skilled hard working private sector electricians ..............
The test for contractors are the same whether union or non union, what would make a union laborer any more competent or skilled than a private sector worker??
I know a journeyman electrician who is non union and has had some of his distribution panels shown in trade magazines. They taut how professional and clean his installations are ..............he's fucking non union and slapping the shit out of you union scum bags who are mostly unskilled hacks who need protectionism to keep a fucking job.

When a contractor calls the hall for an electrician and doesn't like the man sent he can refuse him for no given reason. Another will be sent until he's satisfied.

Same with private sector workers, the contractor has the final say on the job and can dismiss any laborer he deems unfit, whether for personal reasons such as the guy is a jerk or just because he don't like the way you smell.
So tow swings and two misses, let's continue ...................

Anyone can be laid off at the discretion of the contractor. There is no seniority.

Another irrelevant point, just as before GC is GOD on a job, he hires and fires at his digression.
Another fucking mute point ........

Our rule is 8 hours work for 8 hours pay.

So which private sector company is it that advertises we get 8 hrs' pay for anything less??
What a moronic fucking statement, are you trying to convey to us that for 8 hrs. of presence on the job the contractor will get 8 hrs of labor??
We all know that is a fucking lie, with set up time, smoke / coffee / pop breaks, bathroom breaks, etc it is not fucking possible ...........

It's in our best interest to keep our signatory contractors health and happy.

Once again name one business in private sector that same tenet would not apply to??

Many times I've had to clean up and finish jobs that scab contractors had screwed up.

There have been many private sector specialist that have had to be called in to fix fucking jobs unions screwed up !!

That's the real story. All this anti-union talk is right wing fantasy.

Those are your lines of shit that have nothing to do with right wing fantasy, just plain old reality which seems to be kicking your ass ..................

And anyone can join our union. Providing he has good mechanical skills and we are not in a recession when there is not enough work.

Well of course whether they have the aptitude or ability to do the job, you take their dues, send them out to do sub standard work and then fight to keep them from getting fired. You need their money in the form of union dues and will take any worthless piece of lazy shit as long as they contribute to the cause.

What part of, "When given the choice most workers are voting unions down and out"??

Come on back with some more of that ignorant union parrot bull shit rant ......................

Stay healthy.

The 1% need useful tools like you.

That's the way you ignorant n*ggers are, instead of discussing the matter, when called out you call me a tool and infer that I belong to the 1%........

Well I am a MENSA man but that is top 2% of bell curve ..................

So I got more money and intelligence than a dumb nigga like you ..................

Come on back bitch ................

 

[Harry Dresden]

Something wingnuts don't understand is that man is a social animal.
Progress comes through cooperative activity. Unions negotiate with the combined strength of all the workers.

But those of you who picture yourselves as rugged individuals who rise to the top through your own talents are blinded by your own bullshit and easily divided and conquered.

You bring down the rest of society. But secure in your mythology you'll probably not realize it until it's too late.

You are an angry individual. Must be you are not happy with having to pay dues and go along and have lazy good for nothings making the same money as you doing very little work and still getting credit.

How did you come up with that?

I don't live in a right to work state. I don't work with scabs.

You know, I worked unions for six years, and nothing disgusted me more than hearing my union "brothers" referring to non-union workers as "scabs' - especially when most of the "scabs" would have loved to be in the union but couldn't get in because they didn't know the right people.

most of the "scabs" would have loved to be in the union but couldn't get in because they didn't know the right people.

you have to be a legit worker not a strike breaker......

What? What do you mean?

maybe you should explain what you mean....a scab is someone who crosses the picket line..... i would like to know what you meant by ...
"scabs" would have loved to be in the union but couldn't get in because they didn't know the right people... by crossing that line they are not showing any respect for that union you say they would love to be in....and what did you mean by the right people?....if you are working in the field that that Union covers....you go down to the Hall and inquire about signing up....