Right to work laws

[A18]

Someone explain the point to these things.

[A18]

Blue = right to work
Green = freedom

[Jake]

Wish we were right to work

[A18]

Why? I'd rather just take away unions' legal protections. Then they would dissolve.

[John Dibble]

Employers should be allowed to determine whether they want union workers or not. If they want them, that's fine. If they don't, that's fine. Let them set their own policy.

[A18]

Employers should be allowed to determine whether they want union workers or not. If they want them, that's fine. If they don't, that's fine. Let them set their own policy.

My thoughts exactly. Although screwing over unions certainly has a positive impact on prices...

[dazzleman]

Right to work laws mean that a worker can't be forced to join a union in order to get a particular job.

These laws effectively prohibit a "closed shop" or "union shop" in which a worker must join the union, and pay dues, as a condition of being hired.

Right to work laws are prevalent in areas where unions haven't been very strong, as reflected on the map, and scant in areas that were traditionally industrialized.

Of course, unions hate right to work laws because they reduce their potential income from dues.  They also argue that workers who decline to join the union effectively get protection from the union since the workers will be paid the same as unionized workers in the same position.

[A18]

I know what they are. I'm saying what's the point. Just repeal all the labor laws.

Also: It's ridiculous that you have to pay two people the same amount of money for the same work.

[Nym90]

Right to work laws mean that a worker can't be forced to join a union in order to get a particular job.

These laws effectively prohibit a "closed shop" or "union shop" in which a worker must join the union, and pay dues, as a condition of being hired.

Right to work laws are prevalent in areas where unions haven't been very strong, as reflected on the map, and scant in areas that were traditionally industrialized.

Of course, unions hate right to work laws because they reduce their potential income from dues. They also argue that workers who decline to join the union effectively get protection from the union since the workers will be paid the same as unionized workers in the same position.

And for me, I think the last point is the key. Everyone benefits from the existence of unions, even if they aren't a member. The threat of unionization means that all workers will get better treatment from corporations, because the company will often do whatever it has to to avoid unionization.

So, to me, it's sort of like taxes. No one actually wants to pay union dues, of course, but everyone benefits from them, even those who don't pay. So if they were optional, no one would choose to pay, figuring that someone else would pay, and thus the system would fall apart. You can argue that you don't want the benefits of taxation or union protection, but unfortunately, living in a civilized society means that you sometimes have to benefit from the actions of others.

[dazzleman]

Also: It's ridiculous that you have to pay two people the same amount of money for the same work.

I agree that union rules that mandate equal treatment for people regardless of their level of productivity or their work product are one of the worst things about unions.  They effectively reward mediocrity, punish ambition and extra effort, and create an atmosphere of getting by on the minimal amount of work.  This is one of the things that I dislike most about unions.

Without unions, restrictions like this generally don't apply.

[Nym90]

Also: It's ridiculous that you have to pay two people the same amount of money for the same work.

I agree that union rules that mandate equal treatment for people regardless of their level of productivity or their work product are one of the worst things about unions. They effectively reward mediocrity, punish ambition and extra effort, and create an atmosphere of getting by on the minimal amount of work. This is one of the things that I dislike most about unions.

Without unions, restrictions like this generally don't apply.

I agree. That is definitely a negative aspect. Obviously it is often difficult to judge work performance objectively, but it should be done as best as possible, using methods that are agreed upon in advance by both unions and management.

[opebo]

Of course, unions hate right to work laws because they reduce their potential income from dues.  They also argue that workers who decline to join the union effectively get protection from the union since the workers will be paid the same as unionized workers in the same position.

They are absolutely correct, though in the long run 'right to work' laws destroy the unions' power and lead to much lower wages, worse treatment of workers, etc.

[opebo]

Also: It's ridiculous that you have to pay two people the same amount of money for the same work.

I agree that union rules that mandate equal treatment for people regardless of their level of productivity or their work product are one of the worst things about unions.  They effectively reward mediocrity, punish ambition and extra effort, and create an atmosphere of getting by on the minimal amount of work.  This is one of the things that I dislike most about unions.

Without unions, restrictions like this generally don't apply.

You love that rat race don't you dazzle?  What quality of life!  Working as hard as you can for $3/day.

[dazzleman]

Also: It's ridiculous that you have to pay two people the same amount of money for the same work.

I agree that union rules that mandate equal treatment for people regardless of their level of productivity or their work product are one of the worst things about unions.  They effectively reward mediocrity, punish ambition and extra effort, and create an atmosphere of getting by on the minimal amount of work.  This is one of the things that I dislike most about unions.

Without unions, restrictions like this generally don't apply.

You love that rat race don't you dazzle?  What quality of life!  Working as hard as you can for $3/day.

$3 a day is great money, if you can get it....

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Most anti-union legislation isn't worth the paper it's printed on IF the union leaders know what they're doing.

I should add that removing legal protection would result in more and bloodier strikes than have been seem in the U.S since the Southern WV Mine Wars in the early 20th Century.

[Bono]

Right to work laws mean that a worker can't be forced to join a union in order to get a particular job.

These laws effectively prohibit a "closed shop" or "union shop" in which a worker must join the union, and pay dues, as a condition of being hired.

Right to work laws are prevalent in areas where unions haven't been very strong, as reflected on the map, and scant in areas that were traditionally industrialized.

Of course, unions hate right to work laws because they reduce their potential income from dues.  They also argue that workers who decline to join the union effectively get protection from the union since the workers will be paid the same as unionized workers in the same position.

Unnions have been very strong in kansas and Oklahoma.

[opebo]

Most anti-union legislation isn't worth the paper it's printed on IF the union leaders know what they're doing.

I should add that removing legal protection would result in more and bloodier strikes than have been seem in the U.S since the Southern WV Mine Wars in the early 20th Century.

I think nowadays they'd just be labeled 'terrorists' and would never be heard from again.

[WalterMitty]

everyone knows i have wet dreams about  right to work laws.  i strongly support these laws.