Right to work benefit's who? (living, cost of living, title)

[Finger Laker]

sure you did - you agreed 100% with this

"In fact, workers in "right to work" states, have no job security at all. If the employeer can find someone to do your job for less than you earn, he can "let you go" without giving any reason at all"

agreeing with the premise of RTW deals with the need to provide cause upon termination when it's not really that relevant as cause it related to the separate concept of at will

[shiphead]

Originally Posted by Lakeland Yankee

Unions benefit everyone. Here's a helpful link Right to Work for Less (http://www.aflcio.org/issues/legislativealert/stateissues/work/ - broken link).

No, they don't because Unions are controlled by people. Look all im asking is courtesy or a warning. If im screwing up, let me know, i'll fix it. If i don't get it, fire me. It's that simple. On the other hand, union's have too much control over everything and you're forced to pay them even though you don't want to. The southwest railroad is a great example of a horrid union. Went to a recruiting seminar for the rail and all i can show is with one face.

[Lakeland Yankee]

Originally Posted by w1ngzer0

No, they don't because Unions are controlled by people.

Unions are controlled by YOU the worker through democracy.

Originally Posted by w1ngzer0

Look all im asking is courtesy or a warning. If im screwing up, let me know, i'll fix it. If i don't get it, fire me. It's that simple.

I agree. A union would make sure you got that BEFORE you are fired. And if you are fired they will back you up at the arbitration hearing. Most of the time you will get your job back .

Originally Posted by w1ngzer0

On the other hand, union's have too much control over everything and you're forced to pay them even though you don't want to.

It's well worth $50 a month for job security and better benefits. If no one pays( like in a Right to Work state ) they can't properly defend you in arbitration. That is why Right to Work states are bad . That is my whole point .

Originally Posted by w1ngzer0

The southwest railroad is a great example of a horrid union. Went to a recruiting seminar for the rail and all i can show is with one face.

Not all unions are good. Sometimes you are better off without one.

I'm really neutral on the Union issue , but I am against Right to Work laws because they hurt everyone. Just my 2 cents..............Good Luck

[sassieb75]

Originally Posted by zenkonami

I worked for an inbound (non-sales) directory assistance call center in the Valley many years back. One of the crucial stats was call time, and our "team" in the center had an unbelievably low call time (I forget now what the exact name of the stat was.) We were courteous, efficient and good at our jobs. We were taking in great bonuses because of it.

The company decided to move the bar up for our team (and only our team) so that it was impossible to meet the call time (we scarcely had time to ask, "what city.") After a month or two of "poor performance" and "terrible numbers", our entire team (having earned more in bonuses, raises, and just by way of seniority with the company) was "let go." We received all the common "courtesies" (we got three warnings / write-ups, etc...) at which we put on record that the numbers they were asking for were physically impossible.

Our immediate supervisor (who tried to stick up for us) kept her job, and had her entire team replaced by new recruits the next week. I consulted with a lawyer about it, and he basically told me that unless there was some other circumstance or situation I could dig up, we didn't have much of a case.

That is "At-Will" in action. "Right To Work" would only come into play if there was a union for such employees to protect them from such contracts. As it is, "At-Will" in Arizona is boilerplate stuff.

In fairness, I don't think most employers want to exercise their powers via the "At-Will" clause of the employment contract unless they absolutely have to because it's just too much trouble, but this was a medium sized company that had some other clear ethics issues and seemed more concerned with squeezing out a few quick bucks for the cats on top than developing the company for the long term. That's their right, but it would have been nice to know before taking the job. I had the job for several years and it's tough to explain to some prospective employers now why I was "fired." Not necessarily a game changer, but first impressions are important and I have to word things quite delicately so as not to look like a troublemaker or a bitter ex-employee.

Just my li'l anecdote. Interpret as you will.

What was the name of that company? Was it One-to-one by any chance???

[BJB817]

I couldn't agree more with the previous post. There's a happy medium somewhere.

I'm from MN (a "unionized" state) originally. There unions can go to far to protect the lazy and unproductive and make it hard for some businesses to compete. I worked in the building trades and even though I wasn't union, I indirectly benefited from their presence as my employer had to pay similar wages and benefits to attract and retain good employees.

Now I'm down in "right to work" Texas. I'll preface by saying overall I like it here, but boy do employers get away with murder. This has been my own experience as well as my wife's, who works in human resources. Its really been an eye opener for her.

In my own situation, I went on my own as there's really no incentive to stay working for anyone since the pay and benefits are lacking. I can actually see where this could be a negative for some employers as they can't afford to pay to keep good employees and still be competitive.

It seems like down here its been ingrained in the culture that unions are evil and people just accept such treatment by their employers. Sounds like AZ is much the same...

[twiggy]

Unions also provide insurance and 401ks for those industries that don't have it in a right to work state. Like plumbing and construction. The wages they pay with a union are about 20,000 more a year. Quite a difference.

[blisterpeanuts]

Unionized regions have better wages and benefits--for those with jobs.
Nonunionized regions tend to have worse wages and benefits, but more jobs.

Simply put, you can have lots of jobs at low pay or fewer jobs at high pay. You can't have both.

Wealth is the value of goods and services that are created through hard work. You can't legislate it into existence, and you can't make it grow through taxation, regulation and "right to strike" rules. Our likely next President proposes to tax businesses and "spread the wealth around". When your million dollar employer has to pay $150K more taxes next year, guess what they're going to do? Fire four employees to pay for it. Multiply that by a million. God help us.

Unions are pure crap disguised as gold. Does anyone remember the General Motors strike of 1998? For 54 days, their entire North American production was shut down, costing them over $2 billion, plus countless hundreds of millions more lost by the small businesses that supplied them, e.g. mirror and glass makers. Why? What good did it do? Looking back, with GM down to about $5 billion in cash and no one to borrow from, would anyone say the strike was a good thing? Is there a single employee of GM today who would say, "I'm glad we went on strike. They made some concessions, gave us some money, and it served them right." Answer--probably most of them. As GM circles the drain, these idiots continue to maintain that hurting their own employer is the right thing to do. That's why in about 10 years America will no longer have a domestic car industry, maybe just a few foreign-owned plants to keep the politicians happy.

My grandfather, a shoe jobber in 1950s Brooklyn, had to close down his business when his eyesight failed and he couldn't drive his truck anymore. Why? Because the driver's union was so strong that he was not allowed to hire a driver. They would pick one for him. He refused. By the way, he boasted how he went out of business with no debts, no bankruptcy. Now there's an old fashioned attitude.

[BJB817]

Yep, non unionized regions do tend to have more jobs and are lower paying. Guess who they get to do the jobs then since they don't pay a living American wage-illegals! Yeah!

Ok, I'll stop before the mod shuts me down...

[blisterpeanuts]

Originally Posted by BJB817

Yep, non unionized regions do tend to have more jobs and are lower paying. Guess who they get to do the jobs then since they don't pay a living American wage-illegals! Yeah!

Ok, I'll stop before the mod shuts me down...

You have the right to express your opinions here; why would a moderator shut you down?

You're talking about the extreme low end of the employment scale here. The undocumented workers aren't doing all the non-union work; they're just doing the work no one else would do. Can you honestly say that there are local citizens lining up to dig ditches or pick cotton in the Arizona sun, or to wash dishes in hot kitchens? No one local wants to do that kind of work anymore.

[Lakeland Yankee]

Originally Posted by blisterpeanuts

Unions are pure crap disguised as gold.

Without the help of Unions , regular workers would not have decent working conditions and pay. Unions have helped the American worker so much that their importance can not be denied.

Where do people in Right to Work (for less) states get your "anti-union" hatred from , do they teach you that in the schools , is it in the water ? If you don't like unions than don't work for a union company; but if you do work for a union company, PAY YOUR UNION DUES. Don't be a free-loader , it's not fair to the other workers. That is why Right to Work laws should be abolished.

Originally Posted by blisterpeanuts

My grandfather, a shoe jobber in 1950s Brooklyn, had to close down his business when his eyesight failed and he couldn't drive his truck anymore. Why? Because the driver's union was so strong that he was not allowed to hire a driver. They would pick one for him. He refused.

Come on , this isn't 1950 anymore. Unions don't pick workers, the company does , and most have to go through a strict probationary period before they are even in the union.