Nice to see freedom of speech respected.
Well, apparently they were not out of breath as the tent came down.
They can be pissed all they want but in this society, you cannot assault another individual for disagreeing with you.
Michigan pushes right-to-work measure(24th state in the nation to adopt R-T-W)
- Thread starter RugersGR8
- Start Date
Nice to see freedom of speech respected.
Well, apparently they were not out of breath as the tent came down.
They can be pissed all they want but in this society, you cannot assault another individual for disagreeing with you.
I can't believe there is this much hub-ub over giving a person the choice to join a union or not. The way these guys act, you'd think that they passed a law banning unions.
Most folks aren't saying unions actually are bad (even though some have included personal bad experiences with them)....so your question itself is a straw man and a dodge.
Most folks are saying that mandatory and coerced membership in a union is bad.
Lay out plainly once and for all how you can morally justify mandatory membership and dues payment as a requirement of employment in a free society. The ends don't justify the means, so it's got to be better than "Unions do good stuff".
I earlier posted about working at a refinery that had undergone a strike that turned nasty. It lasted several months, with employees on strike in danger of losing their homes/farms/kids college funds/kids in college, and the list goes on.
Some decided the only way to keep what they had was to cross the "line", and go back to work.
About 30 or so did.
I went to work there about two months after the strike. Tensions were high whenever one of the "scabs that broke the line" was around. Lunch rooms would empty when one of them walked into it.
When one of the "scabs was walking through the unit, it wasn't uncommon for a piece of metal or a tool to drop in their vicinity.
Within a year all of them left, most in fear of their life.
Some decided the only way to keep what they had was to cross the "line", and go back to work.
About 30 or so did.
I went to work there about two months after the strike. Tensions were high whenever one of the "scabs that broke the line" was around. Lunch rooms would empty when one of them walked into it.
When one of the "scabs was walking through the unit, it wasn't uncommon for a piece of metal or a tool to drop in their vicinity.
Within a year all of them left, most in fear of their life.
I guess I don't understand how:
1.) You can seriously make the comment that most folks (presumably on OSA... like even in this thread) aren't saying that unions are bad... We can split hairs over the anti-union comments all day, but c'mon man - there's enough hate in this thread alone to make my point.
I'm not saying Unions are good or bad - they're inanimate organizations. There are no "unions" doing anything wrong, just bad people running an organization - that is where the focus of disgust should be (on the individual people doing the wrong).
2.) Coerced membership is obviously wrong, but who is forcing folks to join a Union? Again - those individuals doing the wrong are whom the focus of anger should be as this is not the purpose of a union in the first place. Legally, there is no forcing of anyone to join a union in order to remain employed - if a company signed a contract with a Union, they are the ones who made the rules so instead of hiring unskilled workers and training them in-house, they thought they'd save money and require the Union to provide skilled workers.
It's just really odd to me that so many folks are all about companies' rights - even if it involves mistreating employees, yet a union should have no rights (but what if all of the employees decided they had enough and exercised - individually / without coercion - their right to stop putting up with a company's treatment?).
I'm not sure if your taking a jab at me on the first comment, but the second comment the video is edited, so how can you draw a conclusion when you didn't see all the evidence? I couldn't care less about Michigans RTW law, but with so many people spreading misinformation someone has to jump in and try to tell the other side of the story. Of all people in America pro 2A people should understand judging all the people just on the bad parts is wrong. Lots of unions I'm sure have the bad which everyone likes to speak of but not every Union is bad, not every union member is a lazy, sorry, overpaid POS, but if we all listened to what a few people always say, they would outlaw unions in the US. The flip side to that is if everyone listened to a select few about gun rights, we would be in the same boat as England...
So I take it you are pro RTW?
That is what is so ridiculous about the rage expressed by these union members. Their union can continue on, they just can't force people to give money to an organization that may not represent their beliefs. They should have that right don't you think?
Fact of the matter is that back during the industrial revolution, unions were very important in improving workers lives. They helped put in place many standards of safety and hour restrictions. But much of what they fought for has become codified in law and the unions have become a reason that workers see their jobs sent overseas. Like it or not, we live in a global economy and that will not be changing anytime soon.
Speaking of straw men, no one is saying that workers should be abused and unions banned. Just that workers ought to have a choice in whether they want to join a union or not.
Most guys have personal experiences about unions that are either positive or negative. My only real exposure to a union is an aunt that works for a public employees union and she is always bragging about how little she has to do, the margaritas she gets to drink during a 2-3 hour lunch, and the expense account that covers it all. She is a secretary and making 50k for doing nearly nothing.
Stories like these and some that dennis has shared show why so many people have such disdain for unions. You're right it's not the union, per se, but the people in it. Which when you break it down is what a union really is, people. Not all union members are free loading thugs but many of them are and that is what garners the reputation of "unions". It is their most defining characteristic in this century.
To clarify, let's think of this a different way. Is it acceptable to tear down a pro-gay marriage demonstration?
What other evidence is necessary? AFP had a tent up and was counter demonstrating. The union members tore it down. What am I missing? That they were provoked? You can say anything you want to, just look at WBC, and have the right to not be assaulted or your demonstration torn down.
Some of you are more naive than I had imagined.
This RTW fight in MI, and the one in WI for that matter, has nothing to do with the rights of workers.
It's about diminishing the power of the unions that support Democratic candidates(their political opponents).
That's why the police and firefighters unions are exempt from RTW legislation because those unions give their money to Republican politicians rather than Democratic politicians.
Police and firefighters will still be forced to join their union and they will still be forced to pay union dues.
And those forced union dues will support the GOP cause.
The lawmakers in those states don't give a crap about workers' rights.
They care about consolidating their own power in office.
If it was really about workers rights the police and firefighters unions would have been the very first to fall under RTW legislation, not the last.
Those politicians would have fallen all over themselves giving the police and firefighters the RTW if it was really about workers' rights.
This RTW fight in MI, and the one in WI for that matter, has nothing to do with the rights of workers.
It's about diminishing the power of the unions that support Democratic candidates(their political opponents).
That's why the police and firefighters unions are exempt from RTW legislation because those unions give their money to Republican politicians rather than Democratic politicians.
Police and firefighters will still be forced to join their union and they will still be forced to pay union dues.
And those forced union dues will support the GOP cause.
The lawmakers in those states don't give a crap about workers' rights.
They care about consolidating their own power in office.
If it was really about workers rights the police and firefighters unions would have been the very first to fall under RTW legislation, not the last.
Those politicians would have fallen all over themselves giving the police and firefighters the RTW if it was really about workers' rights.
Similar threads
