Should People Be Forced To Join A Union And Pay Dues?

[Jack Fate]

They shouldn't be forced to join but they're fools if they don't.

And if they choose not to join, then they shouldn't get any of the benefits their union colleagues fight for.

That's illegal in right to work states. I've worked in both. I much prefer right to work states because I don't want my union dues going to candidate I do not support. That is un-American.

 

[Sallow]

Not really. Union wages made industry unsustainable. The 50 cent an hour wage made them more profitable.

You'd like to make it illegal? How?

Doesn't have to be "illegal". You want to employ 50 cent an hour workers? Guess what..no more government contracts, grants or loans.

You'd see a very quick change in corporate policy.

You know what? I'm okay with that.

Now, about those unsustainable union wages...

As opposed to what? Unsustainable CEO wages?

We got two people in the US right now that control some 108 billion dollars.

That's a little off kilter.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Should People Be Forced To Join A Union And Pay Dues As A Condition Of Their Right To Work?

As a Union Member myself, nobody is Forced to join a Union. There are any number of jobs where if you choose not to join, you are no longer eligible for the job, but that is not a matter of Force.

That is called coercion, which is force by another name.

Your employer decides whether or not you have to pay union dues, or some portion thereof. If that's 'coercion' it's your employer doing it as a condition of your employment...

...kind of like telling you when you have to show up, when you can take your lunch, when you can go home, and what you actually have to DO while you're working there.

I guess that's all 'coercion'. I guess, though, that's also why they PAY you.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Not what I was after but I suppose it will have to do.

Well, your question was rhetorical, designed to make a point rather than to elicit an answer,

so your best bet is to just try making your point in a different fashion.

No, it was not a rhetorical question. But thanks for the mind-reading act.

Can you answer your own question? Do you have what you believe is the correct answer?

 

[Anachronism]

That's illegal in right to work states. I've worked in both. I much prefer right to work states because I don't want my union dues going to candidate I do not support. That is un-American.

I really couldn't care any less about the politics of the Union. They're not telling me how to vote and in terms of the dues... It takes me 34 minutes of work a week to earn that dues money. I probably spend that much time in the bathroom each week. It's an insignificant number.

 

[manifold]

Anybody know whether so-called "right to work" states pay more or less in federal income tax than they receive? I don't, but I'd wager that most, if not all of them receive more than they pay in.

 

[NYcarbineer]

They shouldn't be forced to join but they're fools if they don't.

And if they choose not to join, then they shouldn't get any of the benefits their union colleagues fight for.

That's illegal in right to work states. I've worked in both. I much prefer right to work states because I don't want my union dues going to candidate I do not support. That is un-American.

That's not a right to work issue. You can opt out of political contributions anywhere, as far as I know. You can in New York, and we're not a right to work state.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Anybody know whether so-called "right to work" states pay more or less in federal income tax than they receive? I don't, but I'd wager that most, if not all of them receive more than they pay in.

I think you'll find that those states (turquoise) that are right to work also generally match up with your point.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Just as an aside, the national Libertarian party opposes right-to-work laws.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If your demands for high wages and benefits drive a company overseas or out of business entirely, who is benefiting? Haven't you shot yourself in the foot?

Maybe we should just legally force companies to stay in the country and stay in business, regardless of whether or not they can meet payroll. Or, heck, cut out the middleman and nationalize everything.

What we should do (and yes I know we won't) is only have 'free trade' agreements with nations whose labor laws are reasonably comparable with ours. The remainder should be subject to tariffs or somesuch penalty in order to do business in the U.S., i.e., export here.

Blaming unions because US companies can't compete with 50 cents an hour labor wages overseas is silly.

And pretending that unions have had no role in driving companies out is silly, too.

Since I didn't do that, I can only wonder why you said that to me.

 

[bripat9643]

Just as an aside, the national Libertarian party opposes right-to-work laws.

That's an outright lie:

Platform | Libertarian Party

2.7 Labor Markets

We support repeal of all laws which impede the ability of any person to find employment. We oppose government-fostered forced retirement. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions, and an employer should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union. We oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain.

One thing I've learned about liberals, you can count on anything they say that doesn't jib with your understanding to be a lie.

Liberals do not hesitate to lie about the facts.

Indeed, liberalism is just one big lie.

 

[bripat9643]

That's not a right to work issue. You can opt out of political contributions anywhere, as far as I know. You can in New York, and we're not a right to work state.

That may be true in theory, but in practical terms it's virtually impossible in many states. You often have to sue the union to get them to quit deducting that portion of your dues from your paycheck, and that can take years and cost many thousands of dollars.

 

[manifold]

Just as an aside, the national Libertarian party opposes right-to-work laws.

That's an outright lie:

Platform | Libertarian Party

2.7 Labor Markets

We support repeal of all laws which impede the ability of any person to find employment. We oppose government-fostered forced retirement. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions, and an employer should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union. We oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain.

One thing I've learned about liberals, you can count on anything they say that doesn't jib with your understanding to be a lie.

Liberals do not hesitate to lie about the facts.

Indeed, liberalism is just one big lie.

Apparently they're not the only liars.

I just did 10 minutes worth of my own research and it's readily apparent that the Libertarian party is wholly schizophrenic when it comes to right-to-work laws, and understandably too when you conisder the conflicting elements of "liberty" at issue.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

So I shouldn't need to get 'legal' status and pay taxes to work?

How fucking stupid are you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Just as an aside, the national Libertarian party opposes right-to-work laws.

That's an outright lie:

Platform | Libertarian Party

2.7 Labor Markets

We support repeal of all laws which impede the ability of any person to find employment. We oppose government-fostered forced retirement. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions, and an employer should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union. We oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain.

One thing I've learned about liberals, you can count on anything they say that doesn't jib with your understanding to be a lie.

Liberals do not hesitate to lie about the facts.

Indeed, liberalism is just one big lie.

Your quote proves me right. Right to work prohibits employers from requiring dues payment as a condition of employment;

the libertarian position is that employers should have the choice.

 

[Jack Fate]

As a Union Member myself, nobody is Forced to join a Union. There are any number of jobs where if you choose not to join, you are no longer eligible for the job, but that is not a matter of Force.

That is called coercion, which is force by another name.

Your employer decides whether or not you have to pay union dues, or some portion thereof. If that's 'coercion' it's your employer doing it as a condition of your employment...

...kind of like telling you when you have to show up, when you can take your lunch, when you can go home, and what you actually have to DO while you're working there.

I guess that's all 'coercion'. I guess, though, that's also why they PAY you.

bullshit. The employer withholds my dues and gives it to the union. The employer does not take my dues for their own use and give it to a political candidate. That's idiotic.

 

[JBeukema]

Why should anyone be forced to join an organization they don't want to be part of?

Wanna work? Gotta join up, get approved, and carry our green an/or red card to prove the kollektive has given you permission to work in accordance with their rules.

Compulsory unionism is unconstitutional.

Why? Does a man have a right sell his labour power to whom e wishes in accordance with whatever contract he might negotiate without needing the permission of the collective?

Illegal aliens are not the same as Union forcing. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. And the same goes for taxation by the Government.

If one does not have a legal right to be in the Country, one does not have a legal right to work in the Country. And last I checked every Government in the world controls immigration.

So it's okay as long as the scale is big enough? Your complaint with the unions is that they're not big and authoritarian enough?

What is the difference, other than one of scale?

 

[JBeukema]

To our union supporters:

What gives a union member a greater right to work than a non-union member?

The collective identifies him as a member of the in-group and he has a card identifying him as such...

 

[JBeukema]

leadership is elected. If enough people felt the same way you vote them out and elect new ones that DO "give a shit".

 

[daveman]

Doesn't have to be "illegal". You want to employ 50 cent an hour workers? Guess what..no more government contracts, grants or loans.

You'd see a very quick change in corporate policy.

You know what? I'm okay with that.

Now, about those unsustainable union wages...

As opposed to what? Unsustainable CEO wages?

We got two people in the US right now that control some 108 billion dollars.

That's a little off kilter.

Those are the contracts they signed with the company. And unless you're on the board, it doesn't matter if you like it or not.