Michigan - Right to Work

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

fear4freedom wrote:

Dude noone is taking the union away from you, its just a simple right to have the choice to NOT be in a union! Dont you see the hypocrisy of the left here?

hahahaha ... lukin2006 associated with the LEFT! ... never thought this day would happen ...

Well I really don't like to label myself. But when it comes to people just trying to make a living and needing a union to get better wages and benefits and if that's considered left I have no problem with that.

mikepegg44

polaris_x wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

I think it is a pretty pessimistic view of union members to believe that tons of money to contribute to the political system is necessary to keep unions strong.
This isn't union busting, that is pretty much hyperbole in my opinion...The legislation doesn't take money from unions. I think it is pretty interesting that people think unions cannot exist in the same fashion without forced participation from employees. Very interesting indeed.

what are you arguing here? ... the political contributions of unions or the mandatory fees associated with unions ...

in the end - i don't see how you can't say it's about union busting ... if union membership stays exactly the same and no one opts out ... what you have is basically the status quo ... why impose a piece of contentious legislation for the status quo!? ... the goal is obvious to have people opt out ... and thus reducing the capacity for unions to influence ... ie union busting ...

It is about choice. You can think it is about union busting, but in the end if the union puts out a good product they won't be any weaker and people will be able to choose whether or not to support them. I don't really understand the dislike of this legislation. thinking that unions will be busted by this legislation presumes that people who are in unions aren't happy...well isn't it a little shitty of a union to provide a product that their members aren't happy with and then forces them to stay?

polaris_x

mikepegg44 wrote:

It is about choice. You can think it is about union busting, but in the end if the union puts out a good product they won't be any weaker and people will be able to choose whether or not to support them. I don't really understand the dislike of this legislation. thinking that unions will be busted by this legislation presumes that people who are in unions aren't happy...well isn't it a little shitty of a union to provide a product that their members aren't happy with and then forces them to stay?

good product!? ... this is the land of supersized combos is it not and the capital of processed food!?? ...

if i say to you that you can get a car wash for free but you have a choice of paying ... would you pay? ... and what percentage of people would pay? ... let's go with the car wash costs $10 and is good value ...

youngster

EdsonNascimento wrote:

youngster wrote:

I am a member of a labor union in Boston. I don't understand why the majority of this country is so anti-union. I make a good wage, pay taxes, and work hard for my pay. No one put a gun to my head and forced me to join the union. If I get laid off, when I do get back to work I don't have to take a pay cut. I don't have to go back to school and pay more money to learn a new skill. I don't have to type resumes and go to job interviews to get hired. There is a lot to back me up as a worker. If I am not perfroming up to the standards of the union and the company I work for, I will be laid off. Believe me, word gets around fast who does shitty work and doesn't show up on time etc. It is hard to stay working if you have a bad name in the union. Yes, I pay dues to my local union, but it's like buying an insurance policy. No one boss is going to cut my pay because the company is in the red for the year, or gotta cut back on your days cause there isn't enough work.

There is still a need for unions in this country. Fire Depts, police, athletes, actors, writers, mostly all of them belong to a union. It's not really a bad thing. People get all hung up on paying union dues. If you saw what I made per week after my dues were taken out, you'd be surprised. The dues are almost inconsequential.

This is actually everything that is wrong with Unions. As you said yourself - you have no motivation to improve your skills or seek other employment while out of work. Mommy and Da...I mean the Union will give you a job.

Personally, I prefer to excel on my own. If I'm the best worker, my pay should reflect that. If I'm not good at what I do, I should find a new line of work and not cost other people jobs b/c I've been there longer.

Obviously, not everyone acts in such a way. But, it's the basic premise that is destructive to society. There are plenty of teachers that should be out of jobs while more educated, younger, potentially more talented recent college graduates are shut out by the Union system.

I'm fine if unions exist. But, I also thinks folks should have a right to choose. Don't tell men and women what to do with their bodies...errr... I mean money. You should be free to do as you please. How can anyone not be for that? :?

I think that's kind of off base. I mean, if I get laid off, why should I just go back to school, become more in debt paying for tuition, and improve my education so I can get an entry level position somewhere else for 1/3 of the pay? I get better and learn to do more different jobs, so I have a broad range of skills. There is no tenure or anything with the labor unions like the teachers have. We have a constitution and bylaws we have to abide by. We have a "3 strikes" policy. If you get brought up on charges 3 times in your career, you get kicked out. It's not like you are set for life by being in our union. There are consequences and a code of conduct we have to follow. And I am by no means telling other people what to do. I am simply stating what works for me. I chose union and I am happy with that.

mikepegg44

polaris_x wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

It is about choice. You can think it is about union busting, but in the end if the union puts out a good product they won't be any weaker and people will be able to choose whether or not to support them. I don't really understand the dislike of this legislation. thinking that unions will be busted by this legislation presumes that people who are in unions aren't happy...well isn't it a little shitty of a union to provide a product that their members aren't happy with and then forces them to stay?

good product!? ... this is the land of supersized combos is it not and the capital of processed food!?? ...

if i say to you that you can get a car wash for free but you have a choice of paying ... would you pay? ... and what percentage of people would pay? ... let's go with the car wash costs $10 and is good value ...

so it is ok to force people to pay for something they don't want? oh wait, you supported the individual mandate didn't you? (just a joke)

well, agree to disagree I guess. My hope is that unions re-think the benefits they think they give to their employees. Is last in first out a good policy? Unions are not going away because of this law. They will maybe have to change their focus from being a player on a national stage in every single election, to focusing on protecting their individual members. I think it will be a good thing in the long run.