tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post8772201031326057180..comments2023-11-03T08:09:15.690-05:00Comments on The Conservative Media: Join the fight against union busting petition drive and join new Facebook groupCommunications guruhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15039487955952973487noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post-88184631814738827532007-08-27T09:05:00.000-05:002007-08-27T09:05:00.000-05:00Excellent post and history of the union busting mo...Excellent post and history of the union busting move behind right to work for less laws. Your first sentence really sums it all up: “So called right-to-work laws are state statutes that make it illegal for union members to collect fees for services the law requires them to provide.Communications guruhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15039487955952973487noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post-45452668347539844662007-08-24T23:02:00.000-05:002007-08-24T23:02:00.000-05:00So called right-to-work laws are state statutes th...So called right-to-work laws are state statutes that make it illegal for union members to collect fees for services the law requires them to provide.<BR/><BR/>The National Labor Relations Act was enacted in 1935. It gave workers the right to organize and bargain labor contracts. There were few restrictions on what workers could negotiate and most union contracts required membership in the unionAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post-89489311939098592232007-08-19T12:39:00.000-05:002007-08-19T12:39:00.000-05:00Sorry. You again are misrepresenting your position...Sorry. You again are misrepresenting your position. On this very blog you told me workers do not have a choice of joining a union or not, but in fact they have always had a choice.<BR/><BR/>“Why should people be compelled to pay for something they would choose not to participate in?” You can’t be serious? You know the answer to this and you know my answer to it because I have posted it many timesCommunications guruhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15039487955952973487noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post-6028865760410531972007-08-19T04:56:00.000-05:002007-08-19T04:56:00.000-05:00I claimed it gives them a choice of whether or not...I claimed it gives them a choice of whether or not to be compelled to pay union dues. That makes me a truth teller.<BR/><BR/>Why should people be compelled to pay for something they would choose not to participate in? The fact that Taft-Hartley requires BOTH unions and corporations to treat non-union employees equally and fairly under the terms of any contract should hardly be cause for you to Chetly Zarkohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00853223756872874594noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post-9739642248808255652007-08-15T22:16:00.000-05:002007-08-15T22:16:00.000-05:00Again, people have the choice of being in a union ...Again, people have the choice of being in a union or not being in a union, and you claimed the right to work for less law gave them a choice. That would make you a liar. Why should people who opt out get something for nothing that everyone else is paying for?Communications guruhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15039487955952973487noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post-74782200804455345322007-08-13T00:11:00.000-05:002007-08-13T00:11:00.000-05:00As to your point about opting out of unions now, y...As to your point about opting out of unions now, yes, people can, but why what choice is it really if you have to continue paying the agency fees? Telling me "you have a choice" and then saying "we still get to take your money" no matter what isn't really a choice.Chetly Zarkohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00853223756872874594noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post-7094221862491338362007-08-12T23:54:00.000-05:002007-08-12T23:54:00.000-05:00You write:You are 100 percent wrong. Right to work...You write:<BR/><BR/>You are 100 percent wrong. Right to work for less laws destroy unions...<BR/><BR/>Can you offer me evidence of unions that were "destroyed" by Right to Work laws? Let's see the data. And to be "100% wrong", that would imply that no union anywhere in the nearly half of all RTW states survived. You've got plenty of opportunity for data, too.<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, even Chetly Zarkohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00853223756872874594noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post-17002418868229684962007-08-12T21:20:00.000-05:002007-08-12T21:20:00.000-05:00Thank you for posting, Dub. I agree with you 100 p...Thank you for posting, Dub. I agree with you 100 percent, and I have pointed that fact out to the union-busting advocates like Zarko here when they try floating the lie that the right to work for less law will allow workers not to be in a union because the law already gives then that option. However, I appreciate you further clarifying it.Communications guruhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15039487955952973487noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post-42137127736365815422007-08-12T21:09:00.000-05:002007-08-12T21:09:00.000-05:00“right to work’ laws don’t give workers the choice...“right to work’ laws don’t give workers the choice of whether they want to be in a union or not. Workers already can make that choice in MI. “right to work” laws prevent union members from collecting the cost of representing non-members, something the law requires them to do. When the law requires you do provide expensive legal services and denies you the right to collect for them, something’s Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post-33375183264410811762007-08-12T05:04:00.000-05:002007-08-12T05:04:00.000-05:00A Liberal Is Someone Who’s Liberal With Other Peop...A Liberal Is Someone Who’s Liberal With Other People’s Money,<BR/> And A Reactionary-That’s Someone<BR/>Who Can CountAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post-79374965383134258042007-08-11T08:23:00.000-05:002007-08-11T08:23:00.000-05:00You are 100 percent wrong. Right to work for less ...You are 100 percent wrong. Right to work for less laws destroy unions and unions forced manage to implement safety regulations. Federal law already gives a person the choice not to join a union, and that same federal law required the union to represent that non-union member. You know that. If, for example, a nonunion worker is fired illegally, the union must finance the expensive legal Communications guruhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15039487955952973487noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35718918.post-79702786844011682952007-08-11T02:12:00.000-05:002007-08-11T02:12:00.000-05:00Right to work laws don't change a single safety re...Right to work laws don't change a single safety regulation. They merely give workers the choice of whether they want to be in a union or not. America was founded on liberty - are you seriously suggesting that people not having a choice of who they want to associate with is right? <BR/><BR/>Do you have so much pessimism in American workers that you believe they can't handle a choice? So littleChetly Zarkohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00853223756872874594noreply@blogger.com