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.
NOPE, there are many hardcore states, mainly on the east-coast, that will always have a LOT of union-shops.......even if they become RTW.
So what you will see is....more and more factories and work being done outside of the USA.
Under right to work, why would many people on the east coast keep on giving money to the union as usual when the union under the law is required to represent everyone not paying to the union free of charge. That's quite a cool deal that would certainly be hard to resist.
Unions/Democrats want to steal that liberty of choice from me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73
Your list of complaints are nonsense. People who come into a unionized workplace who get the benefits of that without being in the union are scabs.
No they aren't and you are ignorant if you say otherwise.
ALL OF THESE ARE TRUE - and you can't argue against them, you can only hide from them by saying it is "nonsense" and avoiding a discussion on them.
1) Coerces me to join and pay dues against my will if I want to be a public school teacher.
2) Mismanages my pension and charges a high management fee to do so.
3) Owns the health insurance provider that gets a contractual monopoly so it can overcharge my school/taxpayers/government well above fair market value for the service. So our school has less money to spend on...education.
4) Denies me private ballots on key votes so I am pressured into voting the "correct way"
5) Doesn't have to recertify as a Union with the workers for 20 to 40 years at a time. I could work an entire career and never have a recertification vote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73
It's companies not unions that usually run pension plans and healthcare plans. I'm in a union I have always voted in private. Employees can vote out a union anytime they want.
You are highly ignorant on this topic.
I have never studied a public pension that didn't have Union leaders as a majority on the pension's board.
Detroit's Public Pension was flat run in to the ground by union leaders running the pension. Michigan's teacher pension has a majority Union leader board and they refuse to even admit realistic projections for stocks going forward.
To vote on a pay cut or to cut teachers is private...to vote for recertification every few decades is a PUBLIC vote. President Obama supports public union votes on key issues? Why? So they can taint the vote with pressure. If Unions love it, Democrats will too!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73
The only thing I see is this when union were 35-40% of the workforce, Americans had much more parity in terms of wage growth.
Now that union membership has declined, so have the wages of Americans declined in relation to the wages at the top.
In fact, I can't think of one thing that has gotten better for American workers with declining union membership.
Is the pay better? No. Are the retirement benefits better? No. Is holding on to a job more likely? No is overtime pay more likely now? No.
So while I don't think anything is perfect, I fail to see how declining unionization has aided American workers.
Side issue to the corruption of unions and some of what you say is debatable.
If you like Unions, reform them to help save them.
The irony is, you, you yourself are killing off unions. By accepting, hiding, and diminishing their problems - you encourage the union that there are enough sheep to play games as usual. However, most of us are getting tired.
If the union is that big of a benefit to the workers at your place of employment, they will freely choose to join and pay the union dues without coercion.
If enough choose not to join the union and it weakens the unions and if the union is right that this would hurt the workers - then the workers will freely choose to rejoin the union and pay the dues.
The union is afraid to make the case to the workers why they are important enough to deserve union dues and afraid for the workers to have the liberty to choose if they join and pay union dues.
Stand with liberty. Make Unions earn their members, not coerce their members.
Then unions should lobby to change the law requiring them to represent non-union members free of charge in a unionized workplace.
Under right to work, why would many people on the east coast keep on giving money to the union as usual when the union under the law is required to represent everyone not paying to the union free of charge. That's quite a cool deal that would certainly be hard to resist.
Unions do exist in right-to-work states, people still pay their dues.
They could further improve their standing by not handing out insane amounts of political bribe money in a push for inherently undemocratic ploys such as card check.
Unions/Democrats want to steal that liberty of choice from me.
No they aren't and you are ignorant if you say otherwise.
ALL OF THESE ARE TRUE - and you can't argue against them, you can only hide from them by saying it is "nonsense" and avoiding a discussion on them.
1) Coerces me to join and pay dues against my will if I want to be a public school teacher.
2) Mismanages my pension and charges a high management fee to do so.
3) Owns the health insurance provider that gets a contractual monopoly so it can overcharge my school/taxpayers/government well above fair market value for the service. So our school has less money to spend on...education.
4) Denies me private ballots on key votes so I am pressured into voting the "correct way"
5) Doesn't have to recertify as a Union with the workers for 20 to 40 years at a time. I could work an entire career and never have a recertification vote.
You are highly ignorant on this topic.
I have never studied a public pension that didn't have Union leaders as a majority on the pension's board.
Detroit's Public Pension was flat run in to the ground by union leaders running the pension. Michigan's teacher pension has a majority Union leader board and they refuse to even admit realistic projections for stocks going forward.
To vote on a pay cut or to cut teachers is private...to vote for recertification every few decades is a PUBLIC vote. President Obama supports public union votes on key issues? Why? So they can taint the vote with pressure. If Unions love it, Democrats will too!
Side issue to the corruption of unions and some of what you say is debatable.
If you like Unions, reform them to help save them.
The irony is, you, you yourself are killing off unions. By accepting, hiding, and diminishing their problems - you encourage the union that there are enough sheep to play games as usual. However, most of us are getting tired.
We want a union, we want an honest union.
I don't know where that tirade came from, but just reinterating points I have already refuted is boring.
Joining a unionized workplace and getting the negotiated benefits of the union without joining the union is called being a scab. I'd be perfectly ok for people to not join a union in a workplace, if by law that person's benefits and pay were based on the non union wage and benefit scale for that type of job in their local area.
Most unions are not in charge of pensions. They aren't in charge of health insurance, you vote in secret, and employees can vote out a union at anytime.
The rest of your post is irrelevant.
And ignored my salient point and question, what has gotten better for American workers since the unionized workforce declined from 35-40 to 6-7% in the private sector?
Are wages better? No. Are retirement benefits better? No. Are jobs more secure? No. What's gotten better?
Then unions should lobby to change the law requiring them to represent non-union members free of charge in a unionized workplace.
Good point, unless you are referring to the law where non-union members get union paid representation, because they are FORCED to pay union dues...then the union owes them the representation.
I worked with a teacher once that wasn't in the union (by choice), but was still legally FORCED to pay union dues (not a choice)...and the union had to pay his representation as he sued the law that he shouldn't be forced to pay union dues.
I don't know where that tirade came from, but just reinterating points I have already refuted is boring.
Joining a unionized workplace and getting the negotiated benefits of the union without joining the union is called being a scab. I'd be perfectly ok for people to not join a union in a workplace, if by law that person's benefits and pay were based on the non union wage and benefit scale for that type of job in their local area.
Most unions are not in charge of pensions. They aren't in charge of health insurance, you vote in secret, and employees can vote out a union at anytime.
The rest of your post is irrelevant.
And ignored my salient point and question, what has gotten better for American workers since the unionized workforce declined from 35-40 to 6-7% in the private sector?
Are wages better? No. Are retirement benefits better? No. Are jobs more secure? No. What's gotten better?
Don't be a coward.
You said these points were "nonsense," but you refuse to say why.
Say why these points are wrong or admit you were wrong:
ALL OF THESE ARE TRUE - and you can't argue against them, you can only hide from them by saying it is "nonsense" and avoiding a discussion on them.
My Union:
1) Coerces me to join and pay dues against my will if I want to be a public school teacher. (Recently changed by Republicans).
2) Mismanages my pension and charges a high management fee to do so.
3) Owns the health insurance provider that gets a contractual monopoly so it can overcharge my school/taxpayers/government well above fair market value for the service. So our school has less money to spend on...education.
4) Denies me private ballots on key votes so I am pressured into voting the "correct way"
5) Doesn't have to recertify as a Union with the workers for 20 to 40 years at a time. I could work an entire career and never have a recertification vote.
I am not against unions. I am for efficient unions that lack large corruption.
You by allowing the unions to be inefficient and corrupt spell their demise.
I am not sure on all of the specifics for Ohio, but Ohio appears to have its teacher's pension run by a majority union board of trustees.
The state of Michigan teacher's pension also has a majority union representation on the board of trustees and they make asinine decisions like to ignore mathematical realities.
The city of Detroit public pensions has majority union representation on its pension board and they drove it into the ground TWICE since 2004.
Most local teachers unions are able to get a monopoly for the health insurance provider that the state union owns.
In Michigan it is Messa. In Wisconsin it is WEA Trust.
They spew BS about these health insurance providers being non-profit, ignoring that the NFL has also been non-profit yet has millionaires and billionaire owners. These Union owned health insurance providers pay good salaries to the Union Leaders running them, donate $$$$$$$$$ to Democrats so they look the other way, and overcharge the schools/tax payers/government so there is LESS MONEY FOR EDUCATION.
Yes, you can thank the evil Republicans for the 403B that the Unions fought against. It is much better having more money running through their graft machine.
In my district all BOE employees including teachers are members of the Ohio Public Employment Retirement System (OPERS). I also am a member due to the nature of my job and I will get a pension if I stay long enough.
Not every single district in any state has to join a particular teacher's union. I work in housing an I was also a part of a pension program called the Housing Authority Retirement Trust Fund or HART. HART does not cover all housing authorities just as I'm sure MESSA or WEA Trust don't cover every single school district in MI and WI.
As stated above, all places are different and not all of them do the same. Your seemingly negative experience is not the norm for the rest of the country in regards to public unions.
And FWIW, I am not a democrat and I don't really care for them or republicans so I won't thank anyone for a 403b. I do the regular pension. OPERS is not run by a union.
Even the one you linked which some Ohio school districts participate in does not state that it is run by a union it says board members are current or former teachers. That may be one of the reasons why our district doesn't use it as IMO a pension board should be run by people with extensive financial backgrounds.
What state union owns a health insurance company?
LOL, but as stated, I am familiar with public unions but in my experience they aren't all that bad to get around with and they pose no threat to tax payers like people claim. But that depends on if the organization for which they work is organized and works appropriately with the union. Same goes for private unions.
IMO unions are a good thing to have just to get the dirty air out in the open between management and lay employees. Also contrary to what people think, companies and government officials can be much more corrupt than unions and today they are on a much wider scale. I'd rather have some legal backing and I do wish I could join the union but I can't. Luckily as stated, I work and have always worked for decent organizations.
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.
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.
