Right to Work Bill

[1943Izzy]

I understand that this Bill has a very limited scope and its effects will probably be small at first. But it is the idea of it that bothers me . I believe the only motive behind it is to weaken the unions for political reasons . The unions really dont have much leverage anymore.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Yeah, no leverage except for Federal Law backing their ability to organize and forcing business to "collectively bargain." They basically control the Democratic Party. They have State Law backing "prevailing wage" contracts for government construction. They have the white house re-writing bankruptcy law to help the unions.

Yep, as far as I see it, letting people choose whether or not to be in a union will be the nail in the coffin.

 

[Rookie]

I work in a UAW controlled factory. It all comes down to money. Since we won't be FORCED to pay dues, it will affect their wallet. They fear they may actually have to do their job and represent us.

 

[OneBadV8]

I work in a UAW controlled factory. It all comes down to money. Since we won't be FORCED to pay dues, it will affect their wallet. They fear they may actually have to do their job and represent us.

 

[1911 DeadHead]

No one is keeping you from applying for the non-union job.

No one is stopping you from finding a job where you dont have to pay dues.

 

[octalman]

Unbiased Facts

Just tell why you want it or not? Make the reasons legitimate, Not what the Indiana afl/cio has to say or the National right to work committee. Look at the other 22 states that have it. And also, look at the 28 that do not. The quality of life (in financial terms)in those 28 states is much better. You tube it. there are economic professors and labor professors who are far more educated on the topic than we are, you know what they say?? It doesn't work. Come on people take politics out for just a moment and think of your friends, family, neighbors, etc..

Refer to the Ball State UNBIASED study of Right to Work States vs non. Conclusion: NO difference directly related to having or not having Right to Work Law. Both sides are lying. Many other factors determine economic outcome. The largest factor is whether there is a pro-business climate. That means government does not overtax, over-regulate, and gets out of the way of business. Both Union and non-Union shops benefit in that environment.

Indiana passage of the current Bill will make no difference. If wages go down or up it is because the market dictates the value of goods or services.

Is it that difficult to understand why companies move jobs to Mexico or China? WE the Consumer - All of Us - want low prices on goods and services.
Fed and State Government see corporations as cash cows to tax and tax. Other parts of government regulate every aspect of business operations. This drives the cost of goods and services up. We the Consumer buy the cheaper alternatives from sources not burdened by high taxes and over-regulation. More companies move manufacturing overseas. We the Consumer are happy, until those jobs moved overseas become our jobs that go away.

This is not exclusively a Union vs non-Union issue. It is a Buy American issue. How about we all pledge to buy American as much as possible?

 

[ATM]

...RTW is for our elected officials to debate, as they are paid to do.

Um... no. They are paid to represent us.

I haven't even read RTW, so I won't comment on the bill.

Thanks for your honesty. Since this thread is about the RTW bill, I figured those who posted in it might be familiar with it.

I'm still curious just how many that oppose it don't know firsthand what it is.

 

[sepe]

I work in a UAW controlled factory. It all comes down to money. Since we won't be FORCED to pay dues, it will affect their wallet. They fear they may actually have to do their job and represent us.

That would be the thing that would make the union do their job. The UAW president ($153,248.29), secretary-treasurer ($142,080.87), nice president ($137,718.59), and executive board members ($126,551.13) all make a fairly livable salary. If UAW numbers dropped, they might feel like they should do something to ensure the dues will keep coming in.

 

[Stschil]

I work in Illinois as a union electrician, but I could possibly transfer to Indiana. My biggest gripe, personally, with this bill is if I had transferred and put on a book(list) for employment, this is how some locals work, and a big job got called in, thw possibility of my position being taken by a non union electrician is quite possible. I dont like that. I don't know if this is really gonna affect the big from not hiring union contractors, but maybe. I hope the best for ALL, but if my brothers are stuck sitting at home because of jobs being taken by non union, that will start to bother me. Thats my only gripe. Then maybe union workers will be FORCED, since people like to use that word here, to leave the union. The past 3 years has been horrible for any trade to find work in the whole country union or not. I hope all you union bashers are right and that the economy will flourish because of this bill, but I doubt it will change much.

Your talents and knowledge werent given to you by anyone, you earned them. You could take those and work for yourself and probably make more money
Would you deny another an equal chance to gain employment just because they aren't "your brother"? Who's to say that their talents and knowledge aren't superior or even equal?
A business deserves to chance to get the best value in labor for their money. A worker deserves the chance get the best pay for the value he/she provides to an employer. This should not be contingent on who pays what to who. It should rely on demonstrable experience and knowledge. Why is this an alien concept for the Unions in general?

 

[ATOMonkey]

Refer to the Ball State UNBIASED study of Right to Work States vs non. Conclusion: NO difference directly related to having or not having Right to Work Law. Both sides are lying. Many other factors determine economic outcome. The largest factor is whether there is a pro-business climate. That means government does not overtax, over-regulate, and gets out of the way of business. Both Union and non-Union shops benefit in that environment.

Indiana passage of the current Bill will make no difference. If wages go down or up it is because the market dictates the value of goods or services.

Is it that difficult to understand why companies move jobs to Mexico or China? WE the Consumer - All of Us - want low prices on goods and services.
Fed and State Government see corporations as cash cows to tax and tax. Other parts of government regulate every aspect of business operations. This drives the cost of goods and services up. We the Consumer buy the cheaper alternatives from sources not burdened by high taxes and over-regulation. More companies move manufacturing overseas. We the Consumer are happy, until those jobs moved overseas become our jobs that go away.

This is not exclusively a Union vs non-Union issue. It is a Buy American issue. How about we all pledge to buy American as much as possible?

Exactly. I can't come up with any good reason why either side is getting fired up over RTW other than perception.

The sadist in me kind of likes seeing how fired up all the union people are getting though.

 

[sepe]

Exactly. I can't come up with any good reason why either side is getting fired up over RTW other than perception.

The sadist in me kind of likes seeing how fired up all the union people are getting though.

I "liked" a few pages on Facebook that is nothing but union members throwing fits about RTW. I have fun calling them out on many of their outrageous claims.

 

[cordex]

My biggest gripe, personally, with this bill is if I had transferred and put on a book(list) for employment, this is how some locals work, and a big job got called in, thw possibility of my position being taken by a non union electrician is quite possible. I dont like that.

How is that more possible with RTW than it is currently? RTW doesn't affect in any way who is allowed to work on jobs, just whether a union can make employees join.

I understand that this Bill has a very limited scope and its effects will probably be small at first.

Agreed.

But it is the idea of it that bothers me . I believe the only motive behind it is to weaken the unions for political reasons . The unions really dont have much leverage anymore.

The only way this bill will weaken unions is if unions aren't doing their job anyway. In other words, it will damage only unions that are bad for the workers. Good unions will still draw members. How is that a bad thing?

On the other hand, given the anti-freedom, leftist politicians and policies that unions choose to support, I personally can't say I mind if their political clout is weakened.

 

[hooky]

Listening to Garrison right now and the whole idea of restrictive re-employment has been brought up. Retire before 60 and get another full time job, you lose your pension? Is that true or just talk radio crap?

 

[ATOMonkey]

Listening to Garrison right now and the whole idea of restrictive re-employment has been brought up. Retire before 60 and get another full time job, you lose your pension? Is that true or just talk radio crap?

That depends on the company that is holding your pension.

Also has nothing to do with RTW.

 

[1911 DeadHead]

Your talents and knowledge werent given to you by anyone, you earned them. You could take those and work for yourself and probably make more money
Would you deny another an equal chance to gain employment just because they aren't "your brother"? Who's to say that their talents and knowledge aren't superior or even equal?
A business deserves to chance to get the best value in labor for their money. A worker deserves the chance get the best pay for the value he/she provides to an employer. This should not be contingent on who pays what to who. It should rely on demonstrable experience and knowledge. Why is this an alien concept for the Unions in general?

Unions have alot of pride in their workers. We are usually highly trained, that is why business hires union. I'm not saying a scab can't perform equally, but USUALLY with union labor, it is an implied standard. At first, first I was against the ideas of this bill. Now, I think I'll remain neutral and just hope some good comes out of it. Another thing is that a bill like this could have a different affect on different areas. Maybe down by Indy it can work wonders, but up north it could not.

 

[hooky]

That depends on the company that is holding your pension.

Also has nothing to do with RTW.

I beg to differ. That's a reason I would opt out. Who are they to tell me what I'm able to do after retirement?

Just one more barrier to entry they throw up.

 

[CarmelHP]

Unions have alot of pride in their workers. We are usually highly trained, that is why business hires union. I'm not saying a scab can't perform equally, but USUALLY with union labor, it is an implied standard.

"Scab," nice. "Implied standard," I bet.

 

[bigg cheese]

almost sounds like ISO certification, eh? I had to deal with that when I worked at a factory -- "We consistently do whatever it is we do, be it great or crap."

 

[goinggreyfast]

For those like me who's google-fu is somewhat challenged by a MASSIVE amount of google sites and to keep me from searching through 56 pages of posts--can someone provide me with a link to the RTW bill?

Thanks!

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Exactly. I can't come up with any good reason why either side is getting fired up over RTW other than perception.

The sadist in me kind of likes seeing how fired up all the union people are getting though.

Union supports believe in the right to association. They reject that there is an inverse right to not associate. It's typical libtard stuff.