U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Michigan
 [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 12-06-2012, 09:17 AM
 
7,461 posts, read 9,237,928 times
Reputation: 13479

Advertisements

In many cases, unions have gone overboard and have contributed to a general anti-union public sentiment. However, in all honesty, so called "Right-to-Work" legislation pushed by Republicans is simply an attempt to break unions altogether. People forget the tremendous improvement in working conditions that were brought about by unions. Pensions, overtime pay, safer working conditions...all have been the result of unions standing up to profit-at-all-cost corporations. Sure, improvements may have eventually occurred without unions (e.g. through government imposed working conditions) but unions have been a beneficial force in this country. But now the pendulum is swinging back and corporations are gaining the upper hand...not quite as much as they had in the 1800s, but that clearly seems to be their goal.

The push we're seeing for this legislation isn't purely anti-union, at it's core it's anti-worker.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-06-2012, 09:29 AM
 
Location: West Michigan
12,083 posts, read 35,523,889 times
Reputation: 16932
Here is a study of the two most recent States to adopt RTW laws: Right-to-Work Laws and State-Level Economic Outcomes

It is a rather interesting study that looks at all these "facts" presented by both sides of the issue. It is worth a read if you want to know the TRUE impact of passing RTW laws in a state. I don't expect many to actually read it though, it is much easier to be a sheep and believe whatever side you are on to feed you their BS as the only real truth. A short summery of their findings are this: (I added the bold to the parts that speak directly to the arguments presented in this thread)

Quote:
The role of right-to-work laws on state economies, labor organizations and employees are
controversial and important policy questions. Empirical evidence is far from being
conclusive predominantly due to identification issues. Using a recently developed
econometric technique and exploiting the two most recent cases, -Idaho and Oklahoma- we
examine the effectiveness of right-to-work laws on state-level outcomes. Our results indicate
that the passage of right-to-work laws in Oklahoma affected union membership and
coverage rates and, possibly to some extent, foreign direct investment. As for manufacturing
employment, per capita income and average wage rates, we do not observe any impact
. Our
findings for Idaho, on the other hand, suggest that the laws increased the manufacturing
employment, while it had no effect on per capita income
and are inconclusive for foreign
direct investment.
No where will you find where I have (or will) say that the unions have never been needed. At one time in this Country they were badly needed, now though, their role in the workplace has changed. There are federal labor laws that govern safety, wages, conditions, etc... now the main "purpose" for the unions seem to be stirring strife between workers and management while the union leaders sit fat and happy in their offices collecting their wages that are taken directly from those they are supposed to be "protecting." I wouldn't have a problem with union if the leaders lived by the same rules they impose on their members. If any member of a union is out on a union called strike, the leaders should be limited to strike wages ONLY, no stipends, no benefits, nothing more than the worker on the line gets from the union. I would bet we would see a huge change in how unions dealt with issues if it directly affected those fat-cats sitting in their offices disconnected from the workers. They are nothing more than management, and no different than those they are supposedly protecting the workers from. Hypocrites, every single one of them.

Last edited by Bydand; 12-06-2012 at 09:38 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2012, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Colorado
1,969 posts, read 2,093,959 times
Reputation: 1730
Here's Lyin' Snyder:

"The goal isn't to divide Michigan. It is to bring Michigan together," the governor said, as hundreds of union protesters stormed the Capitol and the governor's office, voicing their opposition to the plan."

Michigan governor vows to OK right-to-work legislation | Detroit Free Press | freep.com

Following the Koch brothers/Walker method, they excluded police and firefighters. Divide and conquer.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2012, 01:16 PM
 
Location: West Michigan
12,083 posts, read 35,523,889 times
Reputation: 16932
That isn't dividing the State, that is the unions trying to bully the state into allowing them to continue business-as-usual which hasn't helped MI in a very, very LONG time.

Did you even glance at the link I posted? If you did, you would see that what the unions are saying is unsubstantiated BS that goes against the real findings of what happens when a state goes RTW.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2012, 01:33 PM
 
Location: Grosse Ile Michigan
28,510 posts, read 67,696,267 times
Reputation: 34425
The unions' worst enemy is the unions. If they had not attempted the power grab in this election and lost soundly, legislators woudl never have raised right to work and Snyder woudl have refused to even consider it. If they had not make themselves irrelevant and even irritating to their own members they woudl get more support and there woudl be more outcry. As it is many thousands of union members are excited about the possibility of right to work, they woudl love tog et out og the union clutches. If the unions had not been so stubborn and forced the jurisdictional disputes and other absurd rules on management, they woudl not be so strongly opposed.In many industries, it is not the wages or benefits the management has a problem with, it is the absurd rules. For example if someone spills something ont he floor, you have to shut down 25 workers while they wait for the janitors union guy to show up because the line workers are not allowed to clean anything up. Or the requirement to have a dozen guys sitting around in a factory doing nothing and allowed to do nothing, but getting paid. They have forced through so many stupid and ridiculous rules, is it any wonder management tends to hate them?

And for the generalizes who think all management is nothing but greedy and evil, I have had tow phone conversations with clients today who are losing money in one case or just stirring money (breaking even) while taking all kinds of risks in the other instance. I said, you need to close your company down, it is not worth the risks you are taking. You could very well lose everything you have if you continue. Their answer. I cannot do that. I have to keep the company open for the sake of my employees. They have been good to me and I cannot just shut down and leave them with no job in order to protect my own assets. Both companies are staying open. In both cases staying open will require the owner to accept a loss of their personal assets, and the possibility of losing all of their personal assets. One guy said - well I started poor, I guess I can end poor.

There are a lot of good management and owner types who care a great deal about the employees. They may hate the unions but they respect their employees a great deal. I do not know what the percentages go such people are, But in my experience dealing with several hundred companies of different sizes, it is substantially more than half. Hating the union does not mean hating the workers any more than hating the government means you hate your country, or your fellow citizens.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2012, 03:36 PM
 
Location: Pure Michigan!
4,694 posts, read 7,996,376 times
Reputation: 7367
At the very least, the unions should give workers who are forced to join some choices as to how their dues are spent. To take money out of someone's paycheck every week and give it to a political cause that that worker does not support is extortion and exploitation at its worst. Why not give workers a form to fill out with a check list of issues that the union supports financially and give workers the freedom to decide where their hard earned money goes? This has always been a major bone of contention for my dh and for me, since he has been forced to be a member of the Teamsters or the UAW for his entire working life.

I remember once, several years ago, when the president of his local happened to be in the office of the company where he worked and my dh simply asked him if he could get a written breakdown of where exactly the union dues go. The union president literally became unglued and was almost screaming at him that it's none of the workers' business where the dues go, that that is for the union brass to decide and that they had the "right kind of people at the top" to distribute the dues as they saw fit. Talk about graft, corruption, and secrecy. A worker doesn't have the right to know where their money goes? Of course not, because the truth is that the fat cats at the top honestly have no respect for the "little guys" and consider them a bunch of ignorant sheep to be manipulated at will for the purpose of gaining political power, all while pretending to care about them. Job's gone to China because the union made ridiculous and unsustainable demands on your employer? Eh, whatever, Mr. Union still has his job, that's all that really matters.

Pathetic.

Put the shoe on the other foot for a minute, if you can; how would you libs feel knowing that your hard earned money had been taken from you to fund Mitt Romney's Presidential campaign and you had no power to do anything about it? Not so pretty from the other side, is it? What about the all important freedom of choice? Only for some people in some circumstances, it seems.

Last edited by canudigit; 12-06-2012 at 04:35 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2012, 04:29 PM
 
Location: West Michigan
3,119 posts, read 5,762,460 times
Reputation: 4447
Maybe if we pass right-to-work, the rest of Michigan will become more like Grand Rapids/West Michigan (which is generally anti-union.)

You know... job growth, lower unemployment, better quality of life.

Look around. We have a great example in our own state of the difference between an area dominated by unions and an area that isn't.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2012, 07:27 PM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,387 posts, read 32,148,502 times
Reputation: 14636
Quote:
Originally Posted by michigan83 View Post
Maybe if we pass right-to-work, the rest of Michigan will become more like Grand Rapids/West Michigan (which is generally anti-union.)

You know... job growth, lower unemployment, better quality of life.

Look around. We have a great example in our own state of the difference between an area dominated by unions and an area that isn't.
How do the average incomes compare?

If we go right to work, I'm getting out of teaching. Unlike other professions, teaching is not comptetitive. Districts do not compete for the best talent. What they want is the cheaptest talent. I think our quality of education will sink to that of other RTW states.

Sadly, I'm starting to think leaving engineering to teach was the biggest mistake of my life. Fortunately, I hear that engineering is starting to pick up in other states.

How do you think people in non competitive jobs, like teaching, will fare under RTW?

I worked for a charter school that was non union and the conditions were horrible. Small, overcroded classrooms that lacked safety equipment. Try doing labs with 32 students in a 750 sq ft room (NSTA guidelines call for no more than 24 kids in a 1500 sq. ft. room). I couldn't afford to buy what I needed (I spent about $1000/year when employed there but that was my limit) because I made peanuts. I imagine that is what teaching will become under RTW.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2012, 07:59 PM
 
Location: Grand Rapids Metro
8,885 posts, read 18,054,822 times
Reputation: 3882
Quote:
Originally Posted by michigan83 View Post
Maybe if we pass right-to-work, the rest of Michigan will become more like Grand Rapids/West Michigan (which is generally anti-union.)

You know... job growth, lower unemployment, better quality of life.

Look around. We have a great example in our own state of the difference between an area dominated by unions and an area that isn't.
As a fellow West Michigander, I can't support how this was shoved through the House and Senate in lame duck session, by a bunch of cowardly f**k-tard governor wanna-be conservatives like Dick Devos and the current Republican body in Lansing.

Rep. Bradon Dillon from West Michigan: "No committee hearings, no opportunity to debate amendments, no public input" while protestors in the capitol were kicked out, locked out, pepper sprayed and arrested. Shameful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...v=AsI2xc_FYX0#!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2012, 08:09 PM
 
Location: Colorado
1,969 posts, read 2,093,959 times
Reputation: 1730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bydand View Post
That isn't dividing the State, that is the unions trying to bully the state into allowing them to continue business-as-usual which hasn't helped MI in a very, very LONG time.

Did you even glance at the link I posted? If you did, you would see that what the unions are saying is unsubstantiated BS that goes against the real findings of what happens when a state goes RTW.
I did look at it, yes. Look at this one:

http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/soc/facul...Inequality.pdf

[LEFT]'Union effects on unions on nonunion workers can be motivated in several
ways. Nonunion employers may raise wages to avert the threat of
union organization (Leicht 1989). We argue that unions also contribute
to a moral economy that institutionalizes norms for fair pay, even for
nonunion workers. In the early 1970s, when 1 in 3 male workers were organized,
unions were often prominent voices for equity, not just for their
members, but for all workers. Union decline marks an erosion of the moral
economy and its underlying distributional norms. Wage inequality in the
nonunion sector increased as a result.'[/LEFT]

Lowering wages, job protections and increasing poverty are not good things for our country. It amazes me that any American can believe that income inequality, right to fire at will, no national health care system and no checks and balances on employers are good things.
Rate this post positively 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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > U.S. Forums > Michigan
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, 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