Wisconsin supreme court upholds anti-union law

[galdre]

fine, get rid of all unions and then watch working conditions slowly slide back to 19th century conditions

 

[SuperJay]

fine, get rid of all unions and then watch working conditions slowly slide back to 19th century conditions

True, but those who dismantle those protections aren't benefitting from them (currently). Their parents or grandparents may have, and their children or grandchildren might have, but why let the long-term health of a society and its citizens interfere with short-term political gains?

 

[Junius]

fine, get rid of all unions and then watch working conditions slowly slide back to 19th century conditions

Well since Union membership accounts for less than 12% of the workforce (union representation slightly more) http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/22/business/22union.html are you suggesting that those 11.9% are keeping working conditions safe and wages up for everyone else? I'm skeptical. I feel quite confident child labor and a six-day work week aren't making a comeback.

 

[galdre]

Well since Union membership accounts for less than 12% of the workforce (union representation slightly more) http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/22/business/22union.html are you suggesting that those 11.9% are keeping working conditions safe and wages up for everyone else? I'm skeptical. I feel quite confident child labor and a six-day work week aren't making a comeback.

no, we reserve those working conditions for third-world countries

union membership used to be over 30% (source). We have unions to thank for huge changes in working conditions in the US. Would we go back to pre-union working conditions without the unions? Perhaps not, but to assume they wouldn't get worse I think is being naive.

 

[Archbob]

fine, get rid of all unions and then watch working conditions slowly slide back to 19th century conditions

So you equate making union non-mandatory for teachers as the same thing as outlawing them?

They can still be part of the Teacher's Union, they just aren't forced to be in it just because they want a public teaching job.

 

[galdre]

So you equate making union non-mandatory for teachers as the same thing as outlawing them?

They can still be part of the Teacher's Union, they just aren't forced to be in it just because they want a public teaching job.

No, wasn't equating the two, I just don't agree with the anti-union sentiment of some

The requirement to be in a union for positions covered by the union makes sense when you look at the history of unions and how they were crushed by employers. Some would argue we don't have to worry about employers treating employees like they used to, but I think that is a bit naive.

 

[Archbob]

The requirement to be in a union for positions covered by the union makes sense when you look at the history of unions and how they were crushed by employers.

Union bosses themselves are no better than employers and CEOs. If you can't get people to join a Union without coersion, then there's something wrong with your union.

 

[galdre]

Union bosses themselves are no better than employers and CEOs. If you can't get people to join a Union without coersion, then there's something wrong with your union.

I'll agree that there are some serious issues with unions these days. Like I said though, there are reasons for the requirement to be a union member.

 

[Cutlass]

Thats great, you can join a union and pays dues if you want to, but it just won't be automatically deducted from your salary without you having the option first.

That makes unions weak and lowers GDP.

 

[Arwon]

Thats great, you can join a union and pays dues if you want to, but it just won't be automatically deducted from your salary without you having the option first.

Still have anti-worker industrial relations laws to contend with. Not much protection of arbitration or collective bargaining in the US.

 

[Archbob]

That makes unions weak and lowers GDP.

Irrelevent to the point. People should have the choice to join a union or not in any job, but should not be forced to join.

If you can't get them to join without putting a gun to their head, that union shouldn't exist in the first place.

 

[Traitorfish]

Union bosses themselves are no better than employers and CEOs. If you can't get people to join a Union without coersion, then there's something wrong with your union.

A case for better unions, not for anti-union legislation. Or does the fact of a rotten political culture suggest that we should toss the whole thing out and appoint Il Duce?

 

[Cutlass]

Irrelevent to the point. People should have the choice to join a union or not in any job, but should not be forced to join.

If you can't get them to join without putting a gun to their head, that union shouldn't exist in the first place.

They do have a choice. They can go elsewhere for work. They don't have a right to lower my income.

 

[Archbob]

They do have a choice. They can go elsewhere for work. They don't have a right to lower my income.

Why should they have to if the company hires them? Its not the Union thats hiring them. They should be able to work there without Union intervention. If the union wants them to join so bad, it has to hire them and pay them a paycheck, just like any other organization.

No, the Union have no right to force anyone to join them that they don't employ.


The Job and the Union are two things. If the Union employs you and pays your paycheck, you should have to join the Union. If it doesn't, then you shouldn't have to have anything to do with it if you don't want to.

 

[Cutlass]

Why should they have to if the company hires them? Its not the Union thats hiring them. They should be able to work there without Union intervention. If the union wants them to join so bad, it has to hire them and pay them a paycheck, just like any other organization.

No, the Union have no right to force anyone to join them that they don't employ.


The Job and the Union are two things. If the Union employs you and pays your paycheck, you should have to join the Union. If it doesn't, then you shouldn't have to have anything to do with it if you don't want to.

Sure, that all sounds like a reasonable excuse for destroying the American middle class and American dream.

But that's all it is. An excuse for destroying the American middle class and American dream.

People fight to get a good income. If someone chooses to destroy the ability of others to fight for a good income, they can go elsewhere for a job. Or they can pay me the difference in my income.

What you want is for some people to lower my standard of living and not pay me compensation for it.

 

[Archbob]

Sure, that all sounds like a reasonable excuse for destroying the American middle class and American dream.

But that's all it is. An excuse for destroying the American middle class and American dream.

People fight to get a good income. If someone chooses to destroy the ability of others to fight for a good income, they can go elsewhere for a job. Or they can pay me the difference in my income.

What you want is for some people to lower my standard of living and not pay me compensation for it.

Your first of all mistaken to think they you have some inalienable right to some amount of income.

You and your Union people can still bargain for you. They just can't force other people to bargain along with them. If people want to join the Union they can. You can still fight all you want, but don't expect me to fight with you. You have absolutely zero right to make someone else fight alongside you. if the Union wants to hire and pay extra people to fight with them, they can, thats their right. But if they don't hire and pay, workers should have no obligation to fight with them.

The Union does not have some inalienable right to control all the workers, they, like everyone else, must convince people to join. They have no right to force people to join. People have the right to work where-ever they want and join or not join any organization they want(except the company itself as you can't work and not work for the company at the same time). The union does not own the workers or their time. It has no right to mandatory dues.

Your arguments just seem like a failed excuse for wanting Unions to have to power to coerce people to join even though they don't directly hire the people.

If you want people to join your organization, hire them and pay them like everyone else does. What makes you so special?

 

[Cutlass]

Your first of all mistaken to think they you have some inalienable right to some amount of income.

You and your Union people can still bargain for yourself. They just can't force other people to bargain along with them. If people want to join the Union they can't.

Your arguments just seem like a failed excuse for wanting Unions to have to power to coerce people to join even though they don't directly hire the people.

If you want people to join your organization, hire them and pay them like everyone else does. What makes you so special?

It's a matter of what works. Your way is the zero sum game strategy for a stagnant economy and eventual end of capitalism. Mine is the positive sum game to make capitalism king. I'm not interested in your way.

 

[Archbob]

It's a matter of what works. Your way is the zero sum game strategy for a stagnant economy and eventual end of capitalism. Mine is the positive sum game to make capitalism king. I'm not interested in your way.

Well, I'm not interested in your way and I'm don't agree with your analysis. You should not have the power to force people to act by what you think. People should have a choice.

I should have the right and freedom to fight against your way of thinking and your views without paying you any compensation. In fact, I am guaranteed that right in this country.

I think your way of thinking eventually devolves into socialism and ultimately communism.

 

[Traitorfish]

Well, I'm not interested in your way and I'm don't agree with your analysis. You should not have the power to force people to act by what you think. People should have a choice.

I should have the right and freedom to fight against your way of thinking and your views without paying you any compensation. In fact, I am guaranteed that right in this country.

I think your way of thinking eventually devolves into socialism and ultimately communism.

I think you could do with some book learnin'...

 

[Cutlass]

Well, I'm not interested in your way and I'm don't agree with your analysis. You should not have the power to force people to act by what you think. People should have a choice.

I think your way of thinking eventually devolves into socialism and ultimately communism.

My way is the way to prevent communism and socialism. Your way is the way to convince people that capitalism has no value.