This is what happens in the absence of unions....
-
that is the virtue part.
-
Some would really like Texas and it's "Right to Work" laws which allow people to work and NOT be a part of a union. In practice it effectively outlaws unions.
Some would really like Texas and it's "Right to Work" laws which allow people to work and NOT be a part of a union. In practice it effectively outlaws unions.
Which also in effect, bolsters the right wing agenda.
It's an effective catch-phrase, this RTW. What the goal really is is to cut campaign contributions to the D party. If the Rs would just actually try and show they are not anti-union, anti-blue collar, then it wouldn't be necessary.
-
Some would really like Texas and it's "Right to Work" laws which allow people to work and NOT be a part of a union. In practice it effectively outlaws unions.
Which also in effect, bolsters the right wing agenda.
It's an effective catch-phrase, this RTW. What the goal really is is to cut campaign contributions to the D party. If the Rs would just actually try and show they are not anti-union, anti-blue collar, then it wouldn't be necessary.
Which also in effect, bolsters the right wing agenda.
It's an effective catch-phrase, this RTW. What the goal really is is to cut campaign contributions to the D party. If the Rs would just actually try and show they are not anti-union, anti-blue collar, then it wouldn't be necessary.
In other words working people probably wouldn't flood the DNC coffers unless they were forced to buy their unions.
WSS
-
Which also in effect, bolsters the right wing agenda.
It's an effective catch-phrase, this RTW. What the goal really is is to cut campaign contributions to the D party. If the Rs would just actually try and show they are not anti-union, anti-blue collar, then it wouldn't be necessary.
In other words working people probably wouldn't flood the DNC coffers unless they were forced to buy their unions.
WSS
In other words working people probably wouldn't flood the DNC coffers unless they were forced to buy their unions.
WSS
Forced isn't the right word.
It's not like their flooding the coffers either. Yes, the great majority of union PACs donate to the DNC/candidates, mainly because (like I wrote earlier), the Rs haven't been friendly. The Ds support collective bargaining, Rs don't- it's that simple. If you are a contracted employee, it only makes sense to back a candidate that supports collective bargaining.
-
I would have no problems at all with unions if the company have the option to replace them with people who actually wanted the jobs. Without that there's no equity whatsoever.
WSS
I would have no problems at all with unions if the company have the option to replace them with people who actually wanted the jobs. Without that there's no equity whatsoever.
WSS
Well heres the problem steve-o, these companies would say any of the employees who didnt want to show to work in 155mph+ winds clearly dont want to work. If u cant spin a fucking pizza with water coming in the door and the roof peeling off, what kind of a lazy fuck are u?
-
I've worked for both union and non-union shops.
The difference being, in non-union shops the company takes care of their "pets".
In the union shops, the union takes care of their "pets".
I've worked for both union and non-union shops.
The difference being, in non-union shops the company takes care of their "pets".
In the union shops, the union takes care of their "pets".
Yeah, theres more than a smidge of truth to this.
-
Some would really like Texas and it's "Right to Work" laws which allow people to work and NOT be a part of a union. In practice it effectively outlaws unions.
Which also in effect, bolsters the right wing agenda.
It's an effective catch-phrase, this RTW. What the goal really is is to cut campaign contributions to the D party. If the Rs would just actually try and show they are not anti-union, anti-blue collar, then it wouldn't be necessary.
Which also in effect, bolsters the right wing agenda.
It's an effective catch-phrase, this RTW. What the goal really is is to cut campaign contributions to the D party. If the Rs would just actually try and show they are not anti-union, anti-blue collar, then it wouldn't be necessary.
oh, bullhockey. Why should republicans in a union be forced to pay unions dues, only to have the union be
completyely pro-democratic? I support right to work laws. If my union screws around and is worthless, i"m not paying their dues because I just left. IT's a freakin FREE country. But dems always want to force other people to do their bidding...
-
Which also in effect, bolsters the right wing agenda.
It's an effective catch-phrase, this RTW. What the goal really is is to cut campaign contributions to the D party. If the Rs would just actually try and show they are not anti-union, anti-blue collar, then it wouldn't be necessary.
oh, bullhockey. Why should republicans in a union be forced to pay unions dues, only to have the union be
completyely pro-democratic? I support right to work laws. If my union screws around and is worthless, i"m not paying their dues because I just left. IT's a freakin FREE country. But dems always want to force other people to do their bidding...
-
In other words working people probably wouldn't flood the DNC coffers unless they were forced to buy their unions.
WSS
Forced isn't the right word.
It's not like their flooding the coffers either. Yes, the great majority of union PACs donate to the DNC/candidates, mainly because (like I wrote earlier), the Rs haven't been friendly. The Ds support collective bargaining, Rs don't- it's that simple. If you are a contracted employee, it only makes sense to back a candidate that supports collective bargaining.
Forced isn't the right word.
It's not like their flooding the coffers either. Yes, the great majority of union PACs donate to the DNC/candidates, mainly because (like I wrote earlier), the Rs haven't been friendly. The Ds support collective bargaining, Rs don't- it's that simple. If you are a contracted employee, it only makes sense to back a candidate that supports collective bargaining.
sure sounds like extortion to me. Collective bargaining is fine, but collective "we'll break your company unless you
give in to our unnecessary demands" isn't just collective bargaining. URW retirees had their pension insurance cut
more than a couple of times - the union gave the retirees the finger, to keep their current members status quo.
Oh yeah, retirees don't pay the union dues that go to political PACS. that was garbage. Why should someone be
forced to pay their union dues for all those years, then get the cold shoulder after they retire? That's low.
Right to work laws would keep unions honest in their negotiations for retirees. You screw over the retirees, the
union members see what is going on and stop paying dues. Without right to work, unions aren't held accountable to
it's members and retirees.
-
Which also in effect, bolsters the right wing agenda.
It's an effective catch-phrase, this RTW. What the goal really is is to cut campaign contributions to the D party. If the Rs would just actually try and show they are not anti-union, anti-blue collar, then it wouldn't be necessary.
oh, bullhockey. Why should republicans in a union be forced to pay unions dues, only to have the union be
completyely pro-democratic? I support right to work laws. If my union screws around and is worthless, i"m not paying their dues because I just left. IT's a freakin FREE country. But dems always want to force other people to do their bidding...
oh, bullhockey. Why should republicans in a union be forced to pay unions dues, only to have the union be
completyely pro-democratic? I support right to work laws. If my union screws around and is worthless, i"m not paying their dues because I just left. IT's a freakin FREE country. But dems always want to force other people to do their bidding...
Then you should have no right to be represented whatsoever.
You belong to a church, you put money in the collection basket. You belong to the Elks Club, you pay. Bowling league, golf league, you pay.
You belong to your local Republican club, you pay. They bring up issues/candidates to endorse, you vote on them. Majority wins....just like in a union shop.
It's not really hard to understand.
-
oh, bullhockey. Why should republicans in a union be forced to pay unions dues, only to have the union be
completyely pro-democratic? I support right to work laws. If my union screws around and is worthless, i"m not paying their dues because I just left. IT's a freakin FREE country. But dems always want to force other people to do their bidding...
Then you should have no right to be represented whatsoever.
You belong to a church, you put money in the collection basket. You belong to the Elks Club, you pay. Bowling league, golf league, you pay.
You belong to your local Republican club, you pay. They bring up issues/candidates to endorse, you vote on them. Majority wins....just like in a union shop.
It's not really hard to understand.
Then you should have no right to be represented whatsoever.
You belong to a church, you put money in the collection basket. You belong to the Elks Club, you pay. Bowling league, golf league, you pay.
You belong to your local Republican club, you pay. They bring up issues/candidates to endorse, you vote on them. Majority wins....just like in a union shop.
It's not really hard to understand.
Then fine, I won't belong to the union. and I won't pay dues. I used to belong to a church. Did NOT put money into the collection basket -
unless I felt like it. I did NOT TITHE, either, because I don't believe tithing is scriptural.
Here's a key part you are missing. YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO JOIN the church, or the Elk's Club, or bowling league,or golf league. IT IS ALL VOLUNTARY. So, you are saying I shouldn't have to join your union then? I can go visit any church and not pay one penny. I can visit all year. Probably no membership.
We don't pay one red cent to be in our fantasy leagues. Were you forced to join our fantasy leagues? Nope. and I only joined because they were free. Now, having a job isn't just an elective. You HAVE to have a job.
On another note, lets talk the NRA. I always am a member of the NRA. It costs $40.00. FOR A FREAKING YEAR !
But you don't HAVE TO JOIN.
Now, if I HAVE TO JOIN A UNION, do you realize how much you pay in ONE WEEK? ONE MONTH? and you have no choice in belonging to the union because they SAY SO? It must be tough to understand.
Gee, where's a union where I only pay $40.00 A YEAR? I'm wondering how much you pay in one paycheck. I'm assuming
that is weekly or biweekly.......
-
benefits? being forced to subsidize a political party you want no part of? THAT "BENEFIT"
Not being allowed to pick up a hammer because I'm a grinder? THAT "benefit"
paying a significant part of my EVERY PAYCHECK to a bunch of high paid union bosses, and
I can't buy a new pickup truck? really. THAT "BENEFIT" ?
Going on a long strike over one extra nickle in my paycheck, because a bunch of the union members
want to go on a big vacation during hunting season? THAT "benefit" ?
nah. don't want those benefits. If the company doesn't treat me fairly, I will decide to join the union. If they do,
I don't want to waste my time being taken by unions, and my money taken from me in dues, and I ain't a going
to join your expensive political boys club. Have a nice day.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login