Michigan voting on "right to work", what is the controversy here?

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by buckman

Actually the execs from Hostess were being compensated to stay on through the closings.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

exactly, but that doesnt make good headlines

[Rob Rockcrawler]

I was in a union at my company for a couple of years and we were a closed shop so i had to pay my dues. I didnt get much for it, didnt need anything from the union as i was a good worker. Fast forward 5 years of management and i have far surpassed anything they will make and get better bennies. Funny how our union agent loved me when i was paying dues but when i went to management she became a total bitch. After observing the past couple of years i can really see that at least in my place of work the union really does protect the weak and lazy, its sad. I have guys that totally deserve a merit based raise and i would love to give it to them but cant because they all must be treated the same.

Im from michigan and have seen what the demands of the UAW have done to Flint where i was from. Its a ghost town now. Its not all the fault of the unions but they didnt help. There is a fine line where the employees get paid a decent wage for the job they do and can keep it for a long time, and being over paid and having companies shut their doors and move elsewhere.

[JohnnyD]

Speaking of union corruption and thuggery...

New Unedited Videos Show AFP Tent Being Attacked by Union Thugs as Lefties Claim “False Flag” (Video) Nice Deb

[Piscator]

I was on a business trip to Detroit a few weeks back and was told by a fellow out there that if this passed and a Home Care Giver was legally on the books (even if they were careing for a family member) they would be required to join the Caregivers Union.

Not sure if that is 100% true or not but that is what this guy from Detroit told me. Anyone know if there is any truth to that? Or did he not have is facts straight?

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Piscator

I was on a business trip to Detroit a few weeks back and was told by a fellow out there that if this passed and a Home Care Giver was legally on the books (even if they were careing for a family member) they would be required to join the Caregivers Union.

Not sure if that is 100% true or not but that is what this guy from Detroit told me. Anyone know if there is any truth to that? Or did he not have is facts straight?

Now, I haven't read the exact law but it seems to me that RTW would do exactly the opposite.

[Piscator]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Now, I haven't read the exact law but it seems to me that RTW would do exactly the opposite.

Yes, you are correct. Thanks for the correction. I had mind dyslexia going.

[JohnnyD]

Was gone for a few days and wanted to check and see if any of the anti-Right to Work crowd answered my very simple question. As expected, no one did, likely because they can't.

Tagger or spence, without conflating completely unrelated topics like child-labor laws, US working conditions from 50 years ago or China's lack of labor laws, What is the negative to giving today's US workers a choice to be part of a union or not?

Over the weekend, three other people I was talking to brought up the ridiculousness of Michigan's RTW law, yet not one of them could answer the above question. I think I'm starting to notice a pattern here.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Tagger or spence, without conflating completely unrelated topics like child-labor laws, US working conditions from 50 years ago or China's lack of labor laws, What is the negative to giving today's US workers a choice to be part of a union or not?

In that case the employer has already negotiated with the union to provide representation.

-spence

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by spence

In that case the employer has already negotiated with the union to provide representation.

-spence

Ah yes, another vague response that dodges the question.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Ah yes, another vague response that dodges the question.

LOL JD, get in line, I'm still waiting for his answers to 5 of my unanswered questions.
Spence is like a shrewd politician, he thinks if he waits long enuff and dances
around enuff you'll forget the question.

[TheSpecialist]

This is just me, but we all hate free riders right? Illegals with free tuition, welfare abusers etc. This is just another form of it, because in a right to Work state if you work in a Union shop and you don't have to join you still reap the collective bargaining rewards that the other are paying for. Raises, vacation and sick time,bonuses and anything else that union dues are paying for to be bargained you also get, a free ride.

My union dues are less than $20 a week, a small price to pay for the security of a good stable job with a good wage, and great benefits.

[buckman]

After the 29th of December you might see unions at their best. That's when the longshoremen might strike and close down the port of Boston. I guess $55.00 an hour isn't enough
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by buckman

After the 29th of December you might see unions at their best. That's when the longshoremen might strike and close down the port of Boston. I guess $55.00 an hour isn't enough
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The Looming Port Strike - National Review Online

immediately reminded me of this:

"His statement was clear, I've come to the middle, look at the bigger picture...it's time for others to as well and do what's right for the people."

I guess some determine "the middle" to be wherever THEY happen to be standing at any particular moment and define compromise as "my way or the highway and you get the blame for whatever goes wrong"