Right to Work Bill

[PistolBob]

The only crooks bigger than labor union management, is the United States Congress.

 

[UncleMike]

You need to go read the legislation. It's won't destroy labor unions, it just won't make it mandatory to join one. Why should ANYONE be forced to pay dues to a labor union they don't want to belong to?

Because......
That's where the Democrats get most of their contributions.
And that's why the Dems are acting like a bunch of little kids over this issue.
No Union dues.
No Democratic Party.
Simple math....

 

[hooky]

When are prevailing wages mandated, outside of a public works/gov job?

 

[mike8170]

Mike-

Hope you didn't misunderstand my post...I wasn't saying that the prevailing wage was too high, just that I don't think it would drop if a right to work bill was passed. As you say, in a competitive bid, the best equipped to do the job will typically get it. Many companies can and will charge a premium for having the best tools and capabilities for the job, and I think that would only continue to support a good relatioship of payment for quality of work.

Not at all, you have had one of the best on this subject. The problem with right to work is most don't understand there is a huge difference in unions when it comes to a factory worker that pushes a button after placing a piece of steel in the press, or the craftsman that believes in the quality of work the taxpayer should have on a public building.
I am the latter.

 

[kludge]

Given that unions have essentially become money laundering mechanisms for the democrats, I'm not surprised that the unions will fight this hard...

QFT. Don't believe it? Check out the top 20... It's especially #3 that I have a problem with... government in cahoots with public employees.

You'd better believe that the Dem are going to walk out. You don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Wanna know something else? #1, ActBlue, was established in 2004... this chart starts in 1989! Their own website though says ~$217M.

Top All-Time Donors, 1989-2012 | OpenSecrets

 

[jwalt01]

In 1961 Marther Luther King Jr. spoke of the right-wing attempts to destroy labor unions:
"In our glorious fight for civil rights, we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, such as 'right to work'…Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining by which unions have improved wages and working conditions of everyone.…Wherever these laws have been passed, wages are lower, job opportunities are fewer and there are no civil rights."

 

[jblomenberg16]

In 1961 Marther Luther King Jr. spoke of the right-wing attempts to destroy labor unions:
"In our glorious fight for civil rights, we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, such as 'right to work'…Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining by which unions have improved wages and working conditions of everyone.…Wherever these laws have been passed, wages are lower, job opportunities are fewer and there are no civil rights."

So, in the 40 years since that speach, it would be very interesting to see the actual results. I don't have the data, so not making a claim either way.

Does anyone have a non-biased source of info to substantiate what MLK Jr. was predicting?

 

[J_Wales]

In 1961 Marther Luther King Jr. spoke of the right-wing attempts to destroy labor unions:
"In our glorious fight for civil rights, we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, such as 'right to work'…Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining by which unions have improved wages and working conditions of everyone.…Wherever these laws have been passed, wages are lower, job opportunities are fewer and there are no civil rights."

King was simply another statist that wanted to use the force of government to coerce certain behavior. In that regard, he had much in common with those he claimed to detest.

 

[gvbcraig]

When are prevailing wages mandated, outside of a public works/gov job?

You hit in on the head public work projects. Or you tax dollars collected from you to pay for union labor on public work projects.

There are times that companies receive grants for a portion of a project, the grants usually have wage scales tied to them that can sometimes kill a project.

On the flip side, if it is a very large privately funded project, I have seen unions go to the membership and get wage concessions. Why don't the unions do that for public work, where they are spending our money.

 

[hooky]

You hit in on the head public work projects. Or you tax dollars collected from you to pay for union labor on public work projects.

There are times that companies receive grants for a portion of a project, the grants usually have wage scales tied to them that can sometimes kill a project.

On the flip side, if it is a very large privately funded project, I have seen unions go to the membership and get wage concessions. Why don't the unions do that for public work, where they are spending our money.

My question was rhetorical, but probably shouldn't have been. Thanks for fleshing it out.

Prevailing wage is just another way to launder money and repay political contributions derived from dues.

 

[Lex Concord]

This is the reason the Dems are a no-show once again at the Statehouse...I know they did this last year and the Repubs pulled this stunt in the past. So tiring. Just once I would like to see a member of that group show up because that was the job they swore to do.

What, can't you just sit at home if you don't like enforcing "Click It or Ticket"

 

[Doug]

It is vitally important that the Democrats, once again, block the legislative session until the Republicans withdraw the Right to Work legislation because, in the democrat's opinion, the voters in Indiana are TOO FRAKING STUPID to know what's good for them. Representative Government is for fools who play by the rules.

Could there possibly exist a more worthless P.O.S. than Comrade Pat Bauer?

 

[J_Wales]

Could there possibly exist a more worthless P.O.S. than Comrade Pat Bauer?[/QUOTE]

Yes.

See fearless leader.

 

[beararms1776]

PASS RIGHT TO WORK!

 

[Bull]

If they want to rewrite this bill to make it fair here are things they need to consider,
1. the non union guy working next to me does not automatically receive the same wages as I do. ( I went through a 3 year apprenticeship program)
2. the employer don't have to give him the health insurance that I helped bargain for.
3. the employer don't have to give him the retirement package that I helped bargain for.
4. if the nonunion employee has an issue the union don't have to represent him.

 

[Hotdoger]

If they want to rewrite this bill to make it fair here are things they need to consider,
1. the non union guy working next to me does not automatically receive the same wages as I do. ( I went through a 3 year apprenticeship program)

On The job training you were being paid for means you should be paid more? Seems to me you owe the companys that let you get the OTJT and you should make less.
2. the employer don't have to give him the health insurance that I helped bargain for.

Company benefits for managment don't exsist?

3. the employer don't have to give him the retirement package that I helped bargain for.

See above.
4. if the nonunion employee has an issue the union don't have to represent him.

When did the union ever support managment employess issues ?

 

[Stschil]

If they want to rewrite this bill to make it fair here are things they need to consider,
1. the non union guy working next to me does not automatically receive the same wages as I do. ( I went through a 3 year apprenticeship program)
Should he be paid Less than you becuse he's not in your union? I agree that experience and demonstrable skills should be compensated at a higher rate, but it should be the Employer's decision as to what those skills are worth. It is the emploee's decision whether he/she wants to work for what is offered. By "negotiating" unions take away both's ability to choose
2. the employer don't have to give him the health insurance that I helped bargain for. Should he be restricted from receiving benefits the EMPLOYER has decided to provide because he's not in your union?
3. the employer don't have to give him the retirement package that I helped bargain for. See above
4. if the nonunion employee has an issue the union don't have to represent him.

Why is it "fair" for a Union to decide what an Empolyee should or shouldn't have and it's not "fair" for the Employer to make the same determination?

Why is it fair to require a worker to pay a union for the priveledge of working (dues)?

 

[ATOMonkey]

If they want to rewrite this bill to make it fair here are things they need to consider,
1. the non union guy working next to me does not automatically receive the same wages as I do. ( I went through a 3 year apprenticeship program)
2. the employer don't have to give him the health insurance that I helped bargain for.
3. the employer don't have to give him the retirement package that I helped bargain for.
4. if the nonunion employee has an issue the union don't have to represent him.

Taft-Hartley Act won't allow that, as far as I know. The "non-union" would have to collectively bargain as well.

We had two seperate contracts going at the same time for several years here.

 

[BigMatt]

Another thing that should be passed is a law forbidding state/city government projects to have a prevailing wage requirement. This is a waste of money and it is also one of the few reasons union skilled labor is still around.

 

[gvbcraig]

If they want to rewrite this bill to make it fair here are things they need to consider,
1. the non union guy working next to me does not automatically receive the same wages as I do. ( I went through a 3 year apprenticeship program) The Associated Builders and Contractors have a 3 and 4 year apprenticeship program for their guys, and they are not union. So what makes the union so special.
2. the employer don't have to give him the health insurance that I helped bargain for. All of our guys have heath insurance and benefits that are market driven not extorted through strikes.
3. the employer don't have to give him the retirement package that I helped bargain for. So that the employers kids have to keep paying, how fair is that to the job creators?
4. if the nonunion employee has an issue the union don't have to represent him. That is right, and most of them would be insulted if the union did try to represent them, after all they are grown adults and can standup for themselves. That said, I find it interesting that the number and type of grivenses I see from union labor is so childish, it makes you laugh ( or cry ).

My three cents, inflation you know.