Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, April 10, 2019

Given the choice of no longer paying to support unions they didn't want to join in the first place, lots of public sector workers took it.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

As wages and benefits continue to stagnate compared to cost of living, those who oppose unions shouldn't wonder why

#1 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2019-04-10 10:31 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

As labor protections and safety requirements deteriorate those who oppose unions shouldn't wonder why.

#2 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2019-04-10 10:47 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3


Do those who stop paying the union dues still receive the benefits of that union?

Does the company have a different set of benefits and wages for union members and union non-members?

#3 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-04-10 11:27 AM | Reply

Do those who stop paying the union dues still receive the benefits of that union?
Does the company have a different set of benefits and wages for union members and union non-members?
#3 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER

Q. Do those who stop paying the union dues still receive the benefits of that union?

A. Yes. The union is required to represent paying members and non paying members alike, in all contract dispute and grievance matters. Both paying and non paying employees will recieve Union Negotiated Pay scale and Benefits equally.

Q. Does the company have a different set of benefits and wages for union members and union non-members?

A. Not generally at the same shop. Many times in different shops, in different states, and countries.

The law was written by Union hating self-dealing politicians who serve their donor class above all others. The intention of the law is to destroy Union representation and political strength.

The war against the working class goes on.

#4 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2019-04-10 11:50 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The Union should only represent dues paying employees.

This law is akin to indentured servitude.

#5 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-04-10 12:13 PM | Reply

It's not a magical new law.

#6 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-04-10 12:14 PM | Reply

Right to work laws = the right to work for less.

#7 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2019-04-10 12:19 PM | Reply

The Union should only represent dues paying employees.
This law is akin to indentured servitude.

#5 | POSTED BY NIXON AT 2019-04-10 12:13 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

In the private sector the union has no choice but to represent all workers the same if located in a right to work state

#8 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2019-04-10 12:21 PM | Reply


@#4 ... The union is required to represent paying members and non paying members alike, in all contract dispute and grievance matters. Both paying and non paying employees will recieve Union Negotiated Pay scale and Benefits equally. ...

I have to wonder how many of those non-union-dues-paying members complain about others in society who seem to get something for nothing, who complain about creeping socialism.

Or don't they care in this instance because it is they who benefit.

#9 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-04-10 12:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If you bothered to read the article, only about 8% of the AFSCME were non-union payers and only about 5% of the SEIU were non-paying members, so they aren't losing that much money, especially considering that these two unions, according to opensecrets.org, spent over 30% of their dues on contributions to politicians, initiative campaigns and PACs.

This is all just sound and fury from the Unions because their political contribution clout has dropped by those percentages, because I guarantee you that no one in the Union itself is taking a pay or benefit cut.

#10 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-04-10 12:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"Right to work laws = the right to work for less."

Why shouldn't you have the right to work for less?

Should you be denied the right to work for more?

#11 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-04-10 01:02 PM | Reply

#11

It's well known that states with right to work laws as a majority have lower incomes.

As wall as benefits etc.

Training is crap in the crafts type work

But have at it. I was just pointing out the obvious

#12 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2019-04-10 01:17 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort