Union thugs go to new low: Bullying Churches

[sangha]

Unions have stepped to a new low by protesting churches in California. Protesting churches because of their use of private contractors instead of union labor. Churches who only employ one or two pastors and one head administrator and operate off of donations.

In Bakersfield, California the local carpenters union is protesting the Grace Baptist Church for hiring a contractor who hired non-union labor. Grace Baptist Church had no control over who the contractor hired.

With video: Unions Protesting Churches in California - Big Government

Since when is it a "shame" to hire non union work? Since when is it required we hire union work?

Is this the United States of America or the Soviet UNION.

They try to bully banks and now churches?

This is ridiculous. This kind of bullying, should not be tolerated.

Only a conservative would think the exercise of ones' 1st amend rights is "bullying"

However, using ones' 1st amend rights to deny service to black people is "freedom"

 

[Newby]

In MOST states there is only one path to licensure for the trades: apprenticeship through the unions.

I am unclear why you object so strenuously to a living wage for your fellow Americans, syrenn, but it seems rather un-christian to me. Mebbe that church's property could have been built with slave labor. Or using stolen materials.

Is slave labor or theft okay by you so long as it enriches some religious outlet? Seems to me paying a decent wage for a day's work should be a religious principle -- as should behaving in a law-abiding manner.

If there are to be two standards of conduct -- one for religious outlets and one for everyone else -- then shouldn't the separate standard for religious outfits be HIGHER? Are you seriously suggesting they get a pass on illegal activity?

I must say Madeline, I've never seen anyone string up strawmen arguments just to tear them right back down as eloquently as you do. Bravo.

I don't believe she said any of the things that you have attributed to her.

1. Why should any person be required to belong to a union, regardless of where they learned their trade? Isn't this supposed to be a free country?

2. She never said she was against a living wage? Where did you come up with that?

3. Where do you get that any church was built with slave labor, let alone this specific church? Same with stolen materials? Where do you come up with this shit?

4. So, first you introduce the topic of slave labor and then accuse her of endorsing it. Gotta love that.

5. Where do you come up with the premise that because the contractors that worked at the church were not union workders that they were not given a 'decent' wage?

6. Why do you care if it's a 'religious' principle at any church? What does that have to do with anything? Another topic that you introduced and then attributed to the post that you quoted.

7. There aren't 'two codes of conduct', that's yet another false premise that you have introduced into the conversation.

8. Why is the standard higher whenever you employ union employees versus non-union employees? Again, your premise, no one elses, yet you keep attributing your thoughts to others.

9. Again, she never remotely suggested that anyone get a pass on illegal activity, yet here you are, yet again, attributing those thoughts to her. What was illegal?

Your entire post was an ill conceived strawman. Nice work.

 

[FA_Q2]

I have firsthand experience in this type of thing as I have worked in the drywall industry in California and my family owns a drywall and framing company that works in California. I can tell you now that there is no requirement for a company to become union but a union company may ONLY hire union workers and they MUST be union to take union jobs. CA is not a right to work state and the unions there wield unprecedented power. We have had union hired thugs go to our sites and physically ATTACK our workers as well as steal and break tools/materials. For a good ten years it was quite but recently there has been another uptick in the violence in unions due to the hard economic times. CA is a shining example of why unions in their current form need to be abolished. I have heard many good things about unions in right to work states but have not had the personal experience to say whether or not they are a good thing.

 

[Frank]

I have firsthand experience in this type of thing as I have worked in the drywall industry in California and my family owns a drywall and framing company that works in California. I can tell you now that there is no requirement for a company to become union but a union company may ONLY hire union workers and they MUST be union to take union jobs. CA is not a right to work state and the unions there wield unprecedented power. We have had union hired thugs go to our sites and physically ATTACK our workers as well as steal and break tools/materials. For a good ten years it was quite but recently there has been another uptick in the violence in unions due to the hard economic times. CA is a shining example of why unions in their current form need to be abolished. I have heard many good things about unions in right to work states but have not had the personal experience to say whether or not they are a good thing.

As someone who lives in a right-to-work state and manages people, there is still a tremendous amount of concern over unions trying to come in and organize our employees. And the real basis is to add to the revenue base that the unions receive. Plain and simple. They had their time, but labor laws have now placed unions in a category of destroying industries. IMHO

 

[FA_Q2]

well, of course that is the basis but does the right to work laws temper the unions into something useful or are they just as destructive? I do not expect them to be good for everyone in all aspects but if there is enough benefit to the worker I could support them with enough options. My main concern is the ability to leave the union at any time. That would give workers the ability to influence the decisions of the union bosses. Particularly forcing them to think a little harder about their political backings.

 

[Frank]

well, of course that is the basis but does the right to work laws temper the unions into something useful or are they just as destructive? I do not expect them to be good for everyone in all aspects but if there is enough benefit to the worker I could support them with enough options. My main concern is the ability to leave the union at any time. That would give workers the ability to influence the decisions of the union bosses. Particularly forcing them to think a little harder about their political backings.

Actually, unions simply are not very prevelant in my area. My company's concern is that we are the largest at what we do. So, in order to get the biggest "bang for the membership buck", they would try and unionize our workers. However, if our entire industry is not unionized and only we are because of our size, then we are at a SERIOUS disadvantage to win work, which in turn means that we would not be able to employee nearly as many people - or any at all.

 

[sangha]

Unions have stepped to a new low by protesting churches in California. Protesting churches because of their use of private contractors instead of union labor. Churches who only employ one or two pastors and one head administrator and operate off of donations.

What's the problem with this? Is it cutting into the time these xtians have scheduled for molesting young children?

 

[syrenn]

What's the problem with this? Is it cutting into the time these xtians have scheduled for molesting young children?

The unions is not protesting pedophiles. They are protesting the use of NON union workers. unions don't give a shit about children, children cant pay dues.