Unions claim right to work law is slavery

I think this post is retarded. I'm all for right-to-work as an employee. It keeps me from having to do the work of lazy lay-abouts and allows employers to get rid of unproductive people.

 

Right to work is more like no right for workers to organize themselves to gain whatever advantage they can in the marketplace . It is totally anti-free market legislation.

 

American's have done it to themselves. They demanded more benefits and salary each year. In the meantime, other countries have developed more manufacturing sophistication. The American factory worker is no longer something unique and he's priced himself out of the market. If you want to compete with Chinese, Korean, Mexican, and other laborers -- either offer something they can't, or accept that your offering is not worth what you've been getting for it.​

 

Screw that. I'm a conservative. Why should I have to pay a Union dues that it's going to funnel into Democrat coffers?

 

My managers always had to tell me to leave when I worked retail. I wanted to get more work done, but because of insurance considerations they couldn't let me work off the clock. I always thought that sucked.

 

The only thing that gets rid of lazy lay abouts is people getting paid based upon individual talent. Period. If you are in an industry that does so, congrats. If you are in an industry that designs their system around the lay abouts, use to getting them, and you go in and bust ass, all you will get is a pat on the back, more work added to your load, all the while you get paid the same as the rest. Union or non. Have been there and done that for 16 years. The shame is people who are hard workers can't be (*)(*)(*)(*)ty workers if they tried. Simply go nuts even trying. So after going from job to job, and realizing nothing changes, you just have to bite the bullet and stay at one and do more than the rest for the same crap wage. Being a hard worker at the bottom is a curse, not a blessing. Despite all the BS merit rhetoric that floats around.

 

I was speaking from a marketing perspective, not technical. No one denies people the right to work. No one is outlawed form working. Quite the contrary people think you're a bum if you don't...so what's up with the name? You have a right to work really does make it seem like someone's saying that you didn't have the right before and now you do...

You have a right to free speech...see, there's a rub. It's an inalienable right of every human. Why does it need to be outlined to be protected?

It's all in how things are couched. When they say "a right to speech" ..." a right to work" it makes it seem like the government and these programs are delivering this to you, doing you a favor. By accepting that you are also saying that they can also take it away.

 

A real "Right to Work" law would guarantee a job for anyone who wants one.

 

LOL. Those people get free higher education, free medical, free housing, and all businessmen around them have to sell their products for barely a profit or they don't move merchandise. You do realize the death of the American pay grade is the death of American consumerism, right? You notice as all the jobs got outsourced, the economy has died? You are probably the same guy who (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)es about state intervention, when that is the only thing propping what's left of this pseudo economy up.

 

LOL. Those people get free higher education, free medical, free housing, and all businessmen around them have to sell their products for barely a profit or they don't move merchandise. You do realize the death of the American pay grade is the death of American consumerism, right? You notice as all the jobs got outsourced, the economy has died? You are probably the same guy who (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)es about state intervention, when that is the only thing propping what's left of this pseudo economy up.

 

I don't believe unions should be able to donate millions to help elect people, the same as I don't believe companies should be allowed to either. Both should be forbidden. The USSC was wrong.

 

Yup. Most major companies are watching overseas markets very closely and marketing is increasingly focusing on overseas markets. There's a nice synergy there in that that income can be used to support overseas production, bypassing the prohibitively expensive U.S. corporate tax.

The answer isn't demanding American companies forgo profitable overseas markets, forgo competitive manufacturing practices, or simply stop making a profit for American stock holders. The answer is finding ways to do things in America better or less expensive than they are done elsewhere.​

 

Sounds like life made you a (*)(*)(*)(*) sandwich and you ate it. Sorry, but if you continue working in places that (*)(*)(*)(*) on you, there is no one to blame but yourself.

 

The right to free speech needs to be protected, so your neighbor can't stop you from freely speaking. It's the same with the right to work.

There's a job in the mill, you want to work and they want to hire you. But the union guy says you can't. The right to work legislation keeps him from stopping you working in the same way free speech legislation keeps him from shutting you up.​

 

Oh, I know. They want their cake and eat it too. They want a 15 trillion economy, where workers have 10 years education to work for 3 dollars a day, still somehow pay 900 a month in rent, while paying 300 a month in utilities, 5 dollars a gallon of gas, 5 dollars for a loaf of bread, etc. etc. etc. I wouldn't mind a monogamous nympho riding a Unicorn and packing a pot of gold, neither one of us are going to get what we want. The only difference is my delusion doesn't destroy the national economy in the process.

 

Oh, I know. They want their cake and eat it too. They want a 15 trillion economy, where workers have 10 years education to work for 3 dollars a day, still somehow pay 900 a month in rent, while paying 300 a month in utilities, 5 dollars a gallon of gas, 5 dollars for a loaf of bread, etc. etc. etc. I wouldn't mind a monogamous nympho riding a Unicorn and packing a pot of gold, neither one of us are going to get what we want. The only difference is my delusion doesn't destroy the national economy in the process.

 

If I had 12 hands I'd applaud you with them all.

 

I agree with this. However, I'm arguing with you over forcing me in the current reality to pay, in essence, money to elect a group of people who I do not agree with. I'm not stating that I think the GOP is any better, however, but I've not heard of union dues being siphoned into GOP campaign coffers.

 

The only difference is those companies found their unicorn, or at least a better horse than the one here. You haven't. If you did, you'd be grabbing her pot of gold too.

A healthy economy comes from people having value to trade each and doing so. It doesn't come from a company making bad business decisions just so they can over pay employees. The only way to fix this economy is to find a way for American's to make something better or something cheaper.​

 

What does "overpay" mean?

 

Please. The difference is globalism vs nationalism. The difference is corporations being able to globalize their wealth, practice absolute advantage, while the worker can't globalize his/her labor. The difference, whether through some creepy one world ideology, or for pure bribery sake, once in Washington a person's loyalty to their nation crumbles to a fine powder and blows away in a global breeze. The difference is an American laborer's livelihood is tied directly to the state of the national economy, while the super wealthy can pack it up and leave. It will not always be this way. Enjoy it, for nothing that good lasts forever. Politicians will be hung, and tariffs will be put back in place.

 

Basically, crony capitalists love the "people will buy it, so there is no such thing as gouging. The purchase justifies the price".
Yet when you flip that to what a worker wants or they don't show up, all hypocritical hell breaks loose.

 

American workers can shift to other countries as easy as companies can. Many folks came to the U.S. seeking jobs, many leave for the same reason.

Tariffs or prohibitions on using the most competitive resources will only make companies less competitive, they will not make asking "do you want fries with that?" actually worth $20/hr + benefits.​

 

Can we be best friends? I'll give you a piece of gum.

 

So, if these union bosses believe that their work being used to benefit other workers is slavery, will they acknowledge that income taxes are slavery for the same reason?