POTENTIAL REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE HOPES FOR FEDERAL “RIGHT-TO-WORK” LAW
Gov. Scott Walker, a possible 2016 U.S. presidential contender, told an interviewer in a report that was broadcast by Radio Iowa on April 25 that he would “seek changes in the civil service system for federal employees” if he were elected president and that he would push for a right-to-work law on the federal level.
Wisconsin became the 25th so-called “right-to-work state” under a law Walker signed on March 9. Right-to-work laws weaken unions by extending all the benefits of union contracts to workers who do not pay dues. Union members and their supporters in Wisconsin held multiple demonstrations to protest the legislation, which was passed in a fast-track process. In 2011, Walker eliminated collective bargaining rights for most public sector workers in the state.
Republicans in Wisconsin now say they have a “better than 50 percent” chance of scrapping state laws that ensure construction workers a living wage. State Rep. Rob Hutton has said he plans to tack his bill to repeal the state’s nearly century-old “prevailing wage” law for construction workers on local and state projects onto the state budget that must pass in the next few months.
A “right-to-work” law is a statute in the United States that prohibits union security agreements, or agreements between labor unions and employers, that govern the extent to which an established union can require employees’ membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring. Right-to-work laws do not aim to provide general guarantee of employment to people seeking work, but rather are a government regulation of the contractual agreements between employers and labor unions that prevents them from excluding non-union workers,[1] or requiring employees to pay a fee to unions that have negotiated the labor contract all the employees work under.
Someone went to wikipedia! And there is 25 states NC being one of them and for a lot of things it’s good because you don’t have unions sucking employers dry and employees through fits about not getting paid crazy amounts of cash for a jobs that don’t really deserve that said pay. I believe if you work hard you should be paid well and if you don’t like how you are paid well it’s also a right to quit state. You can also go work somewhere better
[QUOTE=Mate_Zac;161632]Someone went to wikipedia! And there is 25 states NC being one of them and for a lot of things it’s good because you don’t have unions sucking employers dry and employees through fits about not getting paid crazy amounts of cash for a jobs that don’t really deserve that said pay. I believe if you work hard you should be paid well and if you don’t like how you are paid well it’s also a right to quit state. You can also go work somewhere better[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Mate_Zac;161632]Someone went to wikipedia! And there is 25 states NC being one of them and for a lot of things it’s good because you don’t have unions sucking employers dry and employees through fits about not getting paid crazy amounts of cash for a jobs that don’t really deserve that said pay. I believe if you work hard you should be paid well and if you don’t like how you are paid well it’s also a right to quit state. You can also go work somewhere better[/QUOTE]
I believe people should have the right to organize for better wages and working conditions. What is the fucking issue with that? You think they don’t deserve the pay they are receiving? Maybe you should join a union if you can get “Crazy amounts of cash for jobs that don’t deserve said pay” Seems like a pretty good gig.
[QUOTE=Mate_Zac;161641]something like that. Defiantly a greenhorn tho[/QUOTE]
Wait, are you a defiant 20 something greenhorn admitting you know jack shit about the working world, or are you definitely a 20 something greenhorn admitting you know jack shit about the working world?
Please tell me about all these [B]“unions sucking employers dry and employees through fits about not getting paid crazy amounts of cash for a jobs that don’t really deserve that said pay.”[/B]
I don’t think a national “right to work” law is possible without changing Taft-Hartley. The state laws are allowed under Taft-Hartley section 14(b). Tinkering with national labor law would likely open a can of worms.
[QUOTE=Kennebec Captain;161654]I don’t think a national “right to work” law is possible without changing Taft-Hartley. The state laws are allowed under Taft-Hartley section 14(b). Tinkering with national labor law would likely open a can of worms.[/QUOTE]
Actually it’s quite easy because no existing law can prohibit subsequent Congresses from passing a usurping law.
Theoretically, Congress could pass a law saying that “No person shall be obliged to join a union or other labor organization, nor pay any fees to said organization, as a condition of employment.”
After that, any earlier law would become moot. Of course, if smart, they would add language noting the earlier law, clearly making that law irrelevant.
The problem is you have dock workers leaving 100s of ships off the west coast because of a strike and causing millions lost in U.S. economy, and then you have teachers in Chicago striking and leaving 1000s of students deprived of a education for weeks. That’s not okay. If you don’t like your job ball up and speak up for yourself and not throw a fit whenever you don’t get your way. As far as my age Johnny I am 17 and I paymy taxes and work hard just like many of you. I have plenty of real world experience, working multiple jobs through high school and opening a whole sale marine distributing buisness and running it for three years successfully. The problem with unions is that the wants of the few shouldn’t outway the needs of the many. And they had there place in time but they are outdated
Not every union job in the country makes crazy amounts of cash. Plenty of unions provide there members with living wages, benefits and retirement benefits( medical and pension).
[QUOTE=JohnG;161655]Actually it’s quite easy because no existing law can prohibit subsequent Congresses from passing a usurping law.
Theoretically, Congress could pass a law saying that “No person shall be obliged to join a union or other labor organization, nor pay any fees to said organization, as a condition of employment.”
After that, any earlier law would become moot. Of course, if smart, they would add language noting the earlier law, clearly making that law irrelevant.[/QUOTE]
Obviously it’s not technically difficult, it would be politicly more difficult to undo 80 years of labor law then to chip away at current law.
And not every Union is evil and bad but in general I think the market will set the wages and a free market economy is better. I have a problem when people rely on unions and cause distribances in the economy because they go on strike
[QUOTE=Mate_Zac;161661]And not every Union is evil and bad but in general I think the market will set the wages and a free market economy is better. I have a problem when people rely on unions and cause distribances in the economy because they go on strike[/QUOTE]
U.S. does not have a free market economy, read your Adam Smith. Labor law is designed to minimize disturbances to the economy.
[QUOTE=Mate_Zac;161657]. If you don’t like your job ball up and speak up for yourself and not throw a fit whenever you don’t get your way. The problem with unions is that the wants of the few shouldn’t outway the needs of the many.[/QUOTE]
Speak up for yourself and organize. Speak up for yourself and make a real difference by being in a group of like minded employees. The whims of management should not allow them to run roughshod over the needs of their employees.
your right but just like any law if it’s abused it’s a problem and modern unions have caused major disturbances. And if there a group of people who don’t like it then that’s fine speak up but why have a third party organization be the middleman for you at which is after making money