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.
What a shame. Indiana would be a great state to allow workers to choose whether they want or don't want to join the union in.
If you support workers' rights, you need to support their right to choose whether or not joining a union is in their best interest. Unions are still legal in right to work states, only employees are given more rights.
What a shame. Indiana would be a great state to allow workers to choose whether they want or don't want to join the union in.
If you support workers' rights, you need to support their right to choose whether or not joining a union is in their best interest. Unions are still legal in right to work states, only employees are given more rights.
Maybe in your right to work state, but not in my state. I have relatives who work for the state government and they are not allowed to unionize.
Maybe in your right to work state, but not in my state. I have relatives who work for the state government and they are not allowed to unionize.
Well that's different than right to work. I actually have no problem with private sector unions, if an emloyer is treating their workers badly, there should be costs involved. However with public sector there is a conflict of interest because the unions donate so much. So it's a cycle, the collect dues from public workers, then donate lots of money to sympathetic politicians, then these politicians meet their every request. That's why public sector workers in most states make considerably more than the private sector. In my town the union contract is ridiculous, I'm not lying the work day for city worker except the DMV and courts, police, and essential staff, is 930-400, and 930-300 on Fridays. This is a town on 90,000. That means if you want a pistol permit, have a question about services, need to pay your taxes, need some sort of documentation from the city, that's your window.
And the average worker makes $52,000 for their 34 hour work week. That's why public sector unions are wrong, at least when they are given the power and basically shut down and entire city.
What a shame. Indiana would be a great state to allow workers to choose whether they want or don't want to join the union in.
If you support workers' rights, you need to support their right to choose whether or not joining a union is in their best interest. Unions are still legal in right to work states, only employees are given more rights.
You have to vote whether or not you want a union. And while unions are still legal in right to work states, they aren't unions. Unions are based on collective bargaining, and if you cannot collectively bargain, if you have those that can opt out, not pay dues but still get the same benefits whether they belong to a union or not, then it isn't a union.
Let me give you an example. When you attend college, you belong to the Associated Students of that university, otherwise known as the student body. You have fees for that organization as part of your tuition. You can't opt out of that obligation, you can't say I want the perks of being a member of the student body but I don't want to pay as everyone else must. I want something for nothing.
Same with right to work states. Some workers get something for nothing, the others pay to maintain the union, to gather data and other functions but they don't want to pay their share. That is NOT a union. Collective responsibility and collective returns. No one is better/worse than another, you have the same rights/obligations as anyone else.
And if you think that right to work state workers are given more rights they sure as hell aren't given more pay. Right to work states are among the poorest in the US. This isn't an apology for unions, imo, they have consistently failed the rank and file. But to think that somehow getting rid of them will give workers more rights is plain wrong....
I have a serious problem with what's happening in Wisconsin. I don't think government employees should have better benefits or cheaper benefits than taxpayers.
It makes me sick to see them protesting when they are being asked to pay less than most taxpayers who work in the private sector.
Someone should change the law to make it illegal for politicians to simply not show up at work to avoid voting. Taxpayers pay politicans to show up for work.
I have a serious problem with what's happening in Wisconsin. I don't think government employees should have better benefits or cheaper benefits than taxpayers.
It makes me sick to see them protesting when they are being asked to pay less than most taxpayers who work in the private sector.
Someone should change the law to make it illegal for politicians to simply not show up at work to avoid voting. Taxpayers pay politicans to show up for work.
They probably would return to work if the Republicans in Wisconsin would quit saying "No! It's my way or no way" like little babies. Seriously, the unions gave in to about all of the demands except collective bargaining and the Republican leaders in Wisconsin are pulling the same crap they did last year as the G-NO-P. It's not "compromise" if you keep say no until you get your own way. In fact, that's how most little kids act.
I agree that the Democrats need to be in office, but if the Republicans are not going to act like adults then I guess I can't say anything about the behavior of the Democrats.
I have a serious problem with what's happening in Wisconsin. I don't think government employees should have better benefits or cheaper benefits than taxpayers.
It makes me sick to see them protesting when they are being asked to pay less than most taxpayers who work in the private sector.
Someone should change the law to make it illegal for politicians to simply not show up at work to avoid voting. Taxpayers pay politicans to show up for work.
Those workers have made the requested concessions as far as pay and benefits are concerned. Their issue is that they are going to be stripped of their collective bargaining rights. Walker is flat-out union busting at this point, and that's what the whole hulaballoo is about.
But here's why so many people in this country drive me nuts. You say government employees shouldn't have better benefits than the private sector, so your solution seems to be to make government employees' benefits worse to match those of the private sector. Why not give the private sector better benefits to match what government employees have? Better yet, why not just get a healthcare system that isn't predatory and profit-driven like other first-world countries have so EVERYONE can have medical care? I just don't understand this mentality that says, "Well, if I don't have XXX, neither should anyone else." I think it's such a spiteful attitude.
Oh, and government workers are taxpayers, too.
Last edited by mb919; 02-25-2011 at 09:50 AM..
Reason: elaboration
Why not give the private sector better benefits to match what government employees have? Better yet, why not just get a healthcare system that isn't predatory and profit-driven like other first-world countries have so EVERYONE can have medical care? I just don't understand this mentality that says, "Well, if I don't have XXX, neither should anyone else." I think it's such a spiteful attitude.
Those workers have made the requested concessions as far as pay and benefits are concerned. Their issue is that they are going to be stripped of their collective bargaining rights. Walker is flat-out union busting at this point, and that's what the whole hulaballoo is about.
But here's why so many people in this country drive me nuts. You say government employees shouldn't have better benefits than the private sector, so your solution seems to be to make government employees' benefits worse to match those of the private sector. Why not give the private sector better benefits to match what government employees have? Better yet, why not just get a healthcare system that isn't predatory and profit-driven like other first-world countries have so EVERYONE can have medical care? I just don't understand this mentality that says, "Well, if I don't have XXX, neither should anyone else." I think it's such a spiteful attitude.
Oh, and government workers are taxpayers, too.
It is a joke that we are the only developed nation on earth in which health care works this way. It's because people are being brainwashed by the politicians who serve the rich to believe that if they get the benefits of public sector employees, that many of them won't have a job to enjoy those benefits to begin with and will be destitute and on the street.
In even a relatively conservative country like Australia or Israel, much of the populace of the nation would protest an action like Walker's and fight for the right of private sector workers to have "dignity" as well. Here it's more like, "let's all go down together and drag everyone else down too" and "survival of the fittest, tough crap to the rest of you, just die or something".
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.
.
