Latest Breaking News

MillennialDem

(2,367 posts)

9. Because right to work has nothing to do with "giving workers a choice" it's all about

Mon Jun 30, 2014, 09:43 AM

Jun 2014

busting unions. It's funny to say this to a libertarian as they just stare at you and repeat "I support giving workers a choice whether to join a union or not". Then why should those who don't join benefit? "I support giving workers a choice whether to join a union or not"

The idiots have been suckered into this unions = a choice nonsense while the republicans and oligarchs laugh their butts off.

If you think it's bad enough non-union workers benefit from things unions accomplished that's nothing. In right to work states or states with laws like Wisconsin's Act 10... where there are still unions but no requirement to pay dues, if a worker is a non-member and does not pay dues but then gets into a dispute with management and comes crying to the union, the union MUST legally ($$$) represent said worker.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

72 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court strikes blow to public sector unions [View all] NYC Liberal Jun 2014 OP

If you stupid fucking americans dont god damn wake up soon some of us will stop trying randys1 Jun 2014 #1

Are you American?...If so, you need to speak for (and insult) yourself whathehell Jun 2014 #6

Yes I am American and include myself, I thought that was obvious, if not that is what randys1 Jun 2014 #7

It's not obvious when your form of address is "you Americans" whathehell Jun 2014 #11

Yeah, that is a better way to say it...by the way, didnt Gore have options even after the SC randys1 Jun 2014 #17

He did, chose not to. n/t jtuck004 Jun 2014 #45

Okay, well thanks whathehell Jun 2014 #60

You need to take some yoga joeglow3 Jun 2014 #19

already had two heart attacks, my world includes a rightwing business partner randys1 Jun 2014 #21

I love your passion though! joeglow3 Jun 2014 #58

I'm not insulted by your use of ballyhoo Jun 2014 #24

I totally understand your feelings, I wish California could become an independent country, myself randys1 Jun 2014 #28

I think it will be one day, along with several other ballyhoo Jun 2014 #30

If we break up, the rightwing states will suffer tremendously and ultimately lash out with war randys1 Jun 2014 #32

They are ideologues. They ballyhoo Jun 2014 #37

You know what I have noticed about recent SC rulings randys1 Jun 2014 #39

Even though I am the opposite of you ballyhoo Jun 2014 #42

MG? randys1 Jun 2014 #44

Myasthenia gravis. No. Physicians ballyhoo Jun 2014 #49

I disagree. They possess more land and resources. We have people, they have what we need. freshwest Jun 2014 #68

A comment 90-percent Jun 2014 #33

Sorry. My first obligation is to ballyhoo Jun 2014 #40

Can you relate to me the Bible story of how one-fourth of the World's population will be destroyed DhhD Jun 2014 #50

I think Oligarchs are the modern equivalent of ballyhoo Jun 2014 #51

Agreed. The ultimate goal of the Oligarchs is to reduce the world population, and to DhhD Jun 2014 #43

Does this mean that Unions can reject representing those who don't pay? woodsprite Jun 2014 #2

Not in this case FBaggins Jun 2014 #3

they dont get much over minimum, anyway, but mopinko Jun 2014 #23

AFAIK, no. When I was a steward and my union went on strike, those who scabbed cheerfully walked by freshwest Jun 2014 #27

The union never represented the plaintiff, so that's not really an issue here. hugo_from_TN Jun 2014 #71

How about if you don't pay dues to a union, you don't benefit when they negotiate? alarimer Jun 2014 #4

Because right to work has nothing to do with "giving workers a choice" it's all about MillennialDem Jun 2014 #9

I wonder what it would take to get through to the free-riders? alarimer Jun 2014 #63

My Union secondvariety Jun 2014 #65

+1 exactly! lunasun Jun 2014 #67

The plaintiff in the case does not benefit from any union negotiations or contracts. hugo_from_TN Jun 2014 #70

What is Ralph Nader thinking today? Democat Jun 2014 #5

As long as it doesn't have consequences for him, why the hell should he care davidpdx Jun 2014 #13

He's too busy counting his money to think about his legacy. nt onehandle Jun 2014 #15

Nader? ForgoTheConsequence Jun 2014 #26

But it's so much more fulfilling to run around pointing fingers at everyone instead of doing jtuck004 Jun 2014 #47

Haha, true. ForgoTheConsequence Jun 2014 #59

I worked in an organization packman Jun 2014 #8

A guy at my job in WI had a good idea would be to change the union to a corporation then we'd have MillennialDem Jun 2014 #10

By any other name deancr Jun 2014 #22

My union is called California Teachers roody Jun 2014 #69

Yeah, no surprise there. malthaussen Jun 2014 #12

This message was self-deleted by its author sakabatou Jun 2014 #14

Fortunately, this doesn't have any effect on our Dept. IronGate Jun 2014 #16

do you understand why scotus is more important than any issue you might have leftyohiolib Jun 2014 #18

Duty of Fair Representation deancr Jun 2014 #20

One thing deancr Jun 2014 #25

It could be worse deancr Jun 2014 #29

Applicable to adjunct professors? Downwinder Jun 2014 #31

The way I read it, yes. AngryAmish Jun 2014 #66

Corporations are persons, unions are not persons, humans are not persons. valerief Jun 2014 #34

"humans are not persons" NYC Liberal Jun 2014 #36

Except that men are union members, too, which excludes them from personage. nt valerief Jun 2014 #38

I said it the other day and I'm saying it again. Chan790 Jun 2014 #35

This is why the next presidential election is so important. Ash_F Jun 2014 #41

If they don't want to pay an agency fee. RoccoR5955 Jun 2014 #46

never fully agreed with the I'm not a member but forced to pay rule PatrynXX Jun 2014 #48

I was part-time and paid dues CountAllVotes Jun 2014 #52

But you would still benefit from the the higher pay that the unions negotiate Ash_F Jun 2014 #53

+1,000 CountAllVotes Jun 2014 #54

So you are ok with a worker....... Capt.Rocky300 Jun 2014 #55

I won't lie, when I read the actual facts of the case, I felt for the plaintiff who sued the state. BlueEye Jun 2014 #56

Yeah, it looks like the court took this edge case and went wild. Ash_F Jun 2014 #57

Actually the opinion only applies to these home health care workers AngryAmish Jun 2014 #61

I'll hold off on declaring victory Ash_F Jun 2014 #62

You are right. AngryAmish Jun 2014 #64

Now we just need christx30 Jul 2014 #72