Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-21-2014, 12:02 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,878,374 times
Reputation: 14345

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
I actually agree with the Conservatives in this particular case.
I agree also. I think many liberals would be outraged over a situation like this, though. To compel a mother to pay union dues simply because she's taking care of her child, who requires extraordinary care, is simply wrong. The union does nothing for her. Whether she's a member or not. The argument for dues from non-members is that they benefit from union negotiations, but the personal nature of this woman's relationship with the patient means that she gains nothing from the union activities. For the union to compel dues from her is grossly unfair.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-21-2014, 12:48 PM
 
17,440 posts, read 9,268,656 times
Reputation: 11907
Quote:
Originally Posted by legalsea View Post
Here appears to be a good explanation of the case:

Harris v. Quinn | LII / Legal Information Institute

It may well be an interesting case, if the Court goes beyond the narrow question presented.
Good Article - thanks.
I always read the SCOTUSblog.com when the Supremes are in session. They follow the arguments and the decisions on all the cases before the court. They follow the decisions in real time as they are rendered.

I read SCOTUSblog this morning and was a bit surprised that the US Solicitor General (Donald B. Verrilli, Jr) appeared to be giving the main argument for the defendant (Illinois Governor Quinn). Several unions, Washington D.C. and maybe the DOJ have joined and presented briefs.

Verrilli and the others are basing their defense on a former decision - there is some discussion that the Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977) could be overturned. IF that should happen, it would be an Earthquake in Union circles.

Verrilli doesn't have a very good record here lately in his arguments. The overturn of part of the Voting Rights Ace is an example of that. It's also worth noting that these cases are landing on the docket of the US Supreme Court because of the extreme over-reach by Democrats and Leftists.

Very interesting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2014, 01:21 PM
 
56,988 posts, read 35,198,461 times
Reputation: 18824
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
this is why public sector unions need to be abolished.
That's a ridiculous extrapolation.

This is ONE case that the union should lose and lose big. But to say that ALL public sector unions should be abolished is stupid. Public employees should have the same right of association as everyone else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2014, 01:35 PM
 
33,387 posts, read 34,841,834 times
Reputation: 20030
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
That's a ridiculous extrapolation.

This is ONE case that the union should lose and lose big. But to say that ALL public sector unions should be abolished is stupid. Public employees should have the same right of association as everyone else.
they already do, its called civil service laws. even FDR hated public sector unions, and he was a big time union guy. and considering that the government supports unions, it means they dont negotiate against those unions when contract time rolls around, otherwise they would be negotiating against their own interests. in other words its the union on one side, negotiating with the union on the other side, guess which wins.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2014, 02:00 PM
 
27,307 posts, read 16,222,978 times
Reputation: 12102
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
That's a ridiculous extrapolation.

This is ONE case that the union should lose and lose big. But to say that ALL public sector unions should be abolished is stupid. Public employees should have the same right of association as everyone else.
Its stupid. Look what happened to PATCO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2014, 02:05 PM
 
56,988 posts, read 35,198,461 times
Reputation: 18824
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-310 View Post
Its stupid. Look what happened to PATCO.
Yeah...and being an Air Traffic Controller is some sort if picnic, huh?

You know the conditions they work under?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2014, 02:08 PM
 
27,307 posts, read 16,222,978 times
Reputation: 12102
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
Yeah...and being an Air Traffic Controller is some sort if picnic, huh?

You know the conditions they work under?
Yes I do. I routinely fly my plane and talk to them all the time. I was happy when Reagan canned the whole lot of them. The plane I fly is a turbo-charged C-310 or T-310. Hence my handle. Unions in the public sector are basically useless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2014, 02:11 PM
 
17,440 posts, read 9,268,656 times
Reputation: 11907
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
Yeah...and being an Air Traffic Controller is some sort if picnic, huh?

You know the conditions they work under?
The PATCO Strike broke Federal Law - they gambled that Reagan would let them do it.
They found out they were wrong. That's the thing about a "gamble", sometimes you lose.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2014, 02:17 PM
 
Location: Alaska
7,502 posts, read 5,752,205 times
Reputation: 4885
Wife's forced union and they have yet to do anytging but take some of her her wages. Total waste.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2014, 02:36 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,782 posts, read 17,360,856 times
Reputation: 7990
There was another thread on this w/ a link to a George Will column. Will does a good job covering the First Amendment angles of the case.
Should Government Force Workers Into Unions?

Government should not force people into unions
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:35 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top