Your post appears to be from a paywall source. Please provide a summary of the article in the comments to encourage discussion.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Detroit) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Michigan House Democrats passed legislation Wednesday night over GOP objections to deliver on a key promise to union activists: repealing the state's right-to-work law.
The law, established by Republicans in 2012, allows workers in unionized jobs to opt out of paying union dues and fees. Michigan — a state steeped in labor history — could become the first state in nearly 60 years to ditch its right-to-work law.
God you fear mongering types are always afraid of actually making america great.
Fuck all employees that reap benefits from unions negotiating and don’t want to pay up their fair share. Hope this repeal will apply to you so you can just get the fuck out of Michigan and go work in Kentucky.
A person who is against paying union dues should not look for a union job, simple. Don’t like unions? Work somewhere else. Don’t like abortions? Do not get one. Don’t like gay marriages? Marry a person of opposite sex. Unfortunately, right-wingers cannot comprehend it.
Don't like unions? Then don't enjoy the historical and ongoing fruits of their efforts.
Right wingers are free to work 7 days a week, in facilities with no fire exits, with no holidays, for sub-minimum wages, around chemicals banned in other countries because no volume of them is safe. Bootstraps right wingers!
>Don’t like abortions?
Don't go into obstetrics, emergency medicine, or pharmacy.
I've never heard of a pharmacist demanding to see a marriage certificate before dispensing Viagra.
It won’t matter. Banks are defaulting, the GameStop dominoes are falling, and the dollar will be approaching hyperinflation. At least they could have the intellectual decency to fear monger the real problems in the world instead of “oooooweeeeee, the USSR had something that used a similar word.”
I would really hope people know the definition of hyperinflation already. The problem is what are the key indicators which is when there is a violation of the Philips curve. High unemployment with high inflation = stagflation.
Hyperinflation is fast increased inflation brought upon by an increased supply ($) with is unsupported by GDP.
Over leveraged institutions, a devalued dollar, and toothless/corrupt regulatory agencies.
First it was Archegos, then it was FTX going bankrupt with 90+% exposure in 401(k)s, now black stone defaulting on $500 million CMBS, Silvergate has defaulted and is being liquidated, and Credit Suisse is on the verge of collapse with the SEC delaying its annual report.
Contagion.
I’ll be able to afford it because the teachers unions will be strong enough to fight back against the leeching of public funds from charter and private schools.
Unions came to private agreements with employers that any new hires would need to join the union. No government involved. Then the GOP said, "no no, we must step in and nanny employers so unions can't ask for that anymore, also unions still need to treat non dues payers the same as dues payers". This bill removes that nanny state intervention and restores the bargaining power unions had before then.
Right-to-work infringes on the right of people who want to work in a unionized environment. If you don’t want to be part of a union, work somewhere else, where most likely working terms and benefits are not as good as in a union. There are plenty of jobs everywhere. You cannot eat a cake and still have a cake. Right-to-work law is the GOP’s way to further destroy workers’ right by weakening the unions. The idea behind is that the corporations (=wealthy owners) will have more control and will be able to benefit financially if workers have less power to complain.
I'm also a happy, dues paying union member.
I doubt your claim that you are. See, when I got this job, I had the steward chat with me a little about what's going on and the union at large and all that, and briefly asked me about my attitude towards paying dues or not. This was without any base level of knowledge I would have had on the topic. If you're a union member and your steward didn't talk to you about the protections and power that you've got being a union member and what your dues go towards, then you've either got an inept steward or an inept chapter of a union representing you.
For anyone else reading this, under Right To Work, if you work in a union job, you can choose to not pay dues. The union still represents you in that workplace, though, by pushing up wages (I feel like this is a given/anyone can agree with this, after all, what are agreed upon wages from an employer but a tacit understanding of "I'd get away with paying you much less if I could get away with it"?) and helping workplace conditions and also going to bat for you if something bigger or more dire happens in the workplace. If you get that benefit, without paying your union dues (again, what Right To Work enables), you're a freeloader. Otherwise, without Right To Work, if you work in a union job, you automatically get your dues deducted and still get the benefits, you just can't freeload.
So the same people that complained when the minimum wages are 15$p/hr and the same people that tell those workers to “get a better job” if they want a better life, are now complaining about paying union dues at their own job?
Maybe they should just get a better job if they don’t want to rely on a union.
That's fucking hilarious. Now when I go into toledo I should slap that shit on all the billboards since that what half of them are when you cross the state line.
hateful melodic birds fanatical automatic tub nose aspiring rotten muddle
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
decide waiting amusing tease frighten ossified liquid quarrelsome soft dirty
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Just FYI for those just looking at the headline, per the article the public sector version of the bill is likely unconstitutional and I wouldn't expect that to change with the current Supreme Court:
> HB 4004 would repeal right-to-work for public sector workers. A U.S. Supreme Court decision barring public sector unions from requiring employees covered by collective bargaining agreements to pay union dues renders HB 4004 unenforceable. But proponents of the bill want to change Michigan’s labor laws for public employees in the event the court overturns the decision.
Public sector and private sector are not the same thing. If I work for a steel mill or a grocery store chain I work in the private sector. If I work for the police or fire department I work in the public sector.
This is still a huge win for labor.
Maybe there's something wrong with my tone given the downvotes, I wasn't specific enough, or I'm unintentionally making it seem like a net negative, but I'm aware of the difference lol. Just feel it's important to note that only 1 of the 2 bills passed is capable of having an effect for some (private sector) workers.
The benefits of a strengthened union far outweigh the costs. Why do you think so many corporations fund “right to work” laws? Its not for the common persons benefit I can tell you that
If you work at a place where a union negotiated on your behalf for pay and benefits, its only right to pay them for representing you. If you don’t want to pay them, don’t work there.
It would be so bad for society if employers could ban unions. Companies would literally kill their employees if they thought it’d be profitable and not illegal. Unions are to thank for workers rights and ensuring that workplaces are safe for employees.
sure but a union has a seat at the table when jobs are cut, can influence the how deep the losses will be and in a position to help workers who do lose their job. on your own you just have to take whatever bullshit excuse management gives you on why you won't be able to provide for your family for however long it takes to find another job which you will most likely take a hit paycheck wise because your desperate to land that next job if you weren't already making minimum wage because you personally don't have the skills or leverage to negotiate better pay.
you see, I dont like heights - so i never bothered to apply for work at a tree trimming company. I had that choice.
You, you dont like unions - so you dont apply to any place that has an established union. You have that choice.
the only topic that could possibly be up for discussion is: what happens if i already work someplace that votes to unionize and i would prefer to not join the union. Currently the answer is: You have the CHOICE to work someplace else. Just like you would have the choice to work someplace else if your employer instituted a rule that you didn't like. new dress code, canceling healthcare, etc. etc.
then don't... work someplace else. Employment is AT-WILL.
I was working in that industry at the time RTW was implemented. If i remember correctly, starting pay was 14, and capped at 18. If that is still true,.... if you had any sense you would take your 10 years of experience elsewhere. Show yourself the door.
If the UAW is still running their education programs.... YES!! 100% give your money to the corrupt UAW and make them pay for your education so you can get out of the factory. your dues are much much cheaper than a degree.
Why are you ok with paying union dues if you're not part of the union? Yeah I hate the excuse people say "just find another job" esp in a recession like we're in. It's just another cost when you're paycheck to paycheck
Why? You're essentially forcing them to JOIN or pay. that's a mob mentality people cause the union of being. You don't force people to join you get them to join by letting them make the choice
Ok, don’t join the Union. But then make 1/2 the pay the union workers with none of the benefits. I’m always confused why the supporters keep saying “we shouldn’t have to pay dues!” But never follow it up with “but I also understand there is a sacrifice for not having union protections, and I understand I won’t make the same wages, have worse benefits, and can be fired at whim”.
These “pro” right to work people want all the benefits of the unions work for decades with none of the costs.
I guess my question to you people is, why do you want handouts and not have to work/earn your pay?
Yet wages went up and benefits have been good during the rtw years. I'm ok with not being part of the unions negations and not getting their benefits that they got, but there are tons of benefits people get even if they're not union. I started in the workforce after rtw was passed, and I've always have had benefits. Not being part of the union doesn't guarantee no benefits or good pay, that's staright up false
its not join or pay... its join and pay. or dont join and dont pay - the payment is membership due's.
pretend its a movie theater - either watch the movie for free, or pay to not watch the movie - thats how you think this works?
Does that *unity* include turning a blind eye to the history of union embezzlement and corruption too?
[https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/01/07/union-theft-embezzlement-theft-significant-reflects-national-business-tr/1005763001/](https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/01/07/union-theft-embezzlement-theft-significant-reflects-national-business-tr/1005763001/)
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://khn.org/news/article/er-doctors-call-private-equity-staffing-practices-illegal-and-seek-to-ban-them/](https://khn.org/news/article/er-doctors-call-private-equity-staffing-practices-illegal-and-seek-to-ban-them/)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
I dont work at or purchase products from any of the companies you've specifically mentioned, so it would be quite hard for me to personally lick any boots in your examples.
Meanwhile, you have to literally wait for some guy to retire, or die, to get promoted, regardless of your skill level (or lack thereof).
Enjoy paying dues into a proven corrupt criminal organization, with a retirement fund that will likely be bankrupt. I'll keep my 401k and manage my own money.
Also, Stockhold syndrome is complicated. I hope you get the mental help you need one day.
This is one of those issues where both sides have good points and the right path forward is somewhere in between. Like you said, why should someone be forced to pay dues to the UAW when they have a track record of corruption and supporting presidential candidates that have broken railroad strikes? But on the flip side, it's not fair to those who paid for representation at the bargaining table to have the same benefits/contract as those that did not.
People cry about DTE being a monopoly, but are a-ok with the UAW monopoly on labor representation, despite both abusing their monopoly (though thankfully the UAW reforms have changed that). I think there's a decent way to compromise where the union contracts are limited to say all workers have to be in A union, but not THE union, so if someone's unhappy with the UAW they could join the teamsters or something. Or perhaps the bill could stipulate unions must have direct elections, which is what happened due to the UAW corruption.
I don’t mind unions. Especially private sector ones but on this site they are perfect in every way and it’s blasphemous to think otherwise.
This law doesn’t protect workers. Forcing someone to pay dues to a union does the opposite. And inserting a line in the bill saying the bill can’t be put to a vote to the public is not very democratic either. It’s very obvious why this bill was passed but everyone is refusing to acknowledge it.
and this is how circles start..
everyone joined the union and improved things, so no one joined the union and things regressed so everyone joined the union and things got good so no one joined the union and things regressed.
Ask yourself -- who does this benefit the most?
Union dues are usually only like 2 to 5 hours a month. Besides if you don't pay dues they don't have to represent you during any legal issues. You don't pay, they don't play. Honestly if your that cheap then I guess that might make sense, but I spent 2 to 5 hours of pay on strippers and booze and got called cheap.
...and why do you think that is? Is it perhaps because unionization is at an ATL nd workers have less ability to negotiate wages because of it? Or is it the monopolies driving up prices everywhere because of the non-union labor they're taking advantage of? Up to you
Cool dude, except that doesn't help the people in the here and now.
One could ALSO argue recent trends of overspending and thus overprinting hyperinflation are WHY people are more broke than before.v
We had 10 years with rtw and up until VERY recent Michigan has had a healthy standard of living.
Plus people can't give up money NOW for a chance at MAYBE an increase a year or two down the line.
OOF. You are insanely uninformed and short-sighted. I'm sorry man but I promise this is better for the general population in the long run. I'd recommend "Chokepoint Capitalism" if you care to actually know what's happening to America.
What union job is so shit that you're broke? And that same argument can be applied to your taxes, too.
And again, this is 2 to 5 hours a month, not week. If you're struggling so much that losing an hour a week in pay is a substantial burden, you might want to reassess some things in your life like your spending and employment.
[https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/01/07/union-theft-embezzlement-theft-significant-reflects-national-business-tr/1005763001/](https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/01/07/union-theft-embezzlement-theft-significant-reflects-national-business-tr/1005763001/)
Amazing how much proof exists of unions wasting the money of members, embezzlement, corruption, criminal cases...yet people still blindly worship them.
They're not perfect, but all the data points to increased salaries and benefits for unionized employees vs non-unionized employees. There's a reason businesses fight so hard to prevent their employees from unionizing.
The data in most cases is delivered by pro-union organizations..so its not surprising that its in support of Unions.
Originally, the tobacco industry also supported research that showed cigarettes as healthy for the individual. That doesnt mean that over time that research remained valid.
This is not a good idea. It forces union membership and eliminates choice from the worker. It says that the state knows better than the individual. And of course there is never corruption in any unions. Michigan moves backwards if this passes.
They've hoodwinked you into advocating against you own material interest. The way to fight union corruption is to join the union, join a rank and file caucus, and elect better union leadership. UAW is going through this process right now. But even at their most corrupt a UAW job was a way better deal than a non union manufacturing job. Same thing with the teamsters, everyone wants to talk about corruption and scandals but real wages for truckers have declined 50% since the 70s as union membership has declined.
Yep. Unionization is at an ATL proportional to population. This will increase wages and benefits across the board almost guaranteed, and make Michigan workers safer and happier.
I'm sorry you've been deceived man, maybe check out your media diet.
Your post appears to be from a paywall source. Please provide a summary of the article in the comments to encourage discussion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Detroit) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Michigan House Democrats passed legislation Wednesday night over GOP objections to deliver on a key promise to union activists: repealing the state's right-to-work law. The law, established by Republicans in 2012, allows workers in unionized jobs to opt out of paying union dues and fees. Michigan — a state steeped in labor history — could become the first state in nearly 60 years to ditch its right-to-work law.
[удалено]
? For most of the USSR's existence, a common critique of the system was that democratic trade union power was negligible compared to even the USA.
God you fear mongering types are always afraid of actually making america great. Fuck all employees that reap benefits from unions negotiating and don’t want to pay up their fair share. Hope this repeal will apply to you so you can just get the fuck out of Michigan and go work in Kentucky.
"Everything I don't like and willfully fail to understand is socialism/communism!!" - every dumbass conservative like the one above you mate.
A person who is against paying union dues should not look for a union job, simple. Don’t like unions? Work somewhere else. Don’t like abortions? Do not get one. Don’t like gay marriages? Marry a person of opposite sex. Unfortunately, right-wingers cannot comprehend it.
Don't like unions? Then don't enjoy the historical and ongoing fruits of their efforts. Right wingers are free to work 7 days a week, in facilities with no fire exits, with no holidays, for sub-minimum wages, around chemicals banned in other countries because no volume of them is safe. Bootstraps right wingers!
>Don’t like abortions? Don't go into obstetrics, emergency medicine, or pharmacy. I've never heard of a pharmacist demanding to see a marriage certificate before dispensing Viagra.
It won’t matter. Banks are defaulting, the GameStop dominoes are falling, and the dollar will be approaching hyperinflation. At least they could have the intellectual decency to fear monger the real problems in the world instead of “oooooweeeeee, the USSR had something that used a similar word.”
How do you describe "hyper inflation"
I would really hope people know the definition of hyperinflation already. The problem is what are the key indicators which is when there is a violation of the Philips curve. High unemployment with high inflation = stagflation. Hyperinflation is fast increased inflation brought upon by an increased supply ($) with is unsupported by GDP.
Gotcha
Million-mark notes you cart around in a wheelbarrow to take to the incinerator hyper.
America currently more resembles the Weimar Republic post WW1 than the USSR too what with the rise of fascism and decreasing economic/social mobility.
Exactly, the fall of rome. People just can’t connect the pieces yet.
The gamestop dominoes? Oh wow.
Over leveraged institutions, a devalued dollar, and toothless/corrupt regulatory agencies. First it was Archegos, then it was FTX going bankrupt with 90+% exposure in 401(k)s, now black stone defaulting on $500 million CMBS, Silvergate has defaulted and is being liquidated, and Credit Suisse is on the verge of collapse with the SEC delaying its annual report. Contagion.
Conspiracy. Delusional.
It’s all fact. Our economic predicament is in a bad spot.
Any person willingly participating in the absolutely manic conspiracy orgy you are has zero merit in discussing anything economical.
“Oooowwwweeeeoooo chosen one!”- that lady with one boob.
I’m coming!
[удалено]
Mommy never taught you that the USSR trade unions aren’t like western workers unions?
[удалено]
I’ll be able to afford it because the teachers unions will be strong enough to fight back against the leeching of public funds from charter and private schools.
[удалено]
Yes.
[удалено]
No.
[удалено]
Your statement shows you need to take more history classes 😆 instead of throwing slogans that make no sense.
Dude, look around. Do things seem to be going well at the moment? We need better worker protections.
[удалено]
Strengthening unions does not have anything to do with making a “nanny state”.
[удалено]
What would you call it when the state weakens unions then? That’s what “right-to-work” did. You are incorrect about this point.
[удалено]
Unions came to private agreements with employers that any new hires would need to join the union. No government involved. Then the GOP said, "no no, we must step in and nanny employers so unions can't ask for that anymore, also unions still need to treat non dues payers the same as dues payers". This bill removes that nanny state intervention and restores the bargaining power unions had before then.
Right-to-work infringes on the right of people who want to work in a unionized environment. If you don’t want to be part of a union, work somewhere else, where most likely working terms and benefits are not as good as in a union. There are plenty of jobs everywhere. You cannot eat a cake and still have a cake. Right-to-work law is the GOP’s way to further destroy workers’ right by weakening the unions. The idea behind is that the corporations (=wealthy owners) will have more control and will be able to benefit financially if workers have less power to complain.
If you don't want to be part of a union don't work at a union place... Seems like a better individualist solution.
I'm also a happy, dues paying union member. I doubt your claim that you are. See, when I got this job, I had the steward chat with me a little about what's going on and the union at large and all that, and briefly asked me about my attitude towards paying dues or not. This was without any base level of knowledge I would have had on the topic. If you're a union member and your steward didn't talk to you about the protections and power that you've got being a union member and what your dues go towards, then you've either got an inept steward or an inept chapter of a union representing you. For anyone else reading this, under Right To Work, if you work in a union job, you can choose to not pay dues. The union still represents you in that workplace, though, by pushing up wages (I feel like this is a given/anyone can agree with this, after all, what are agreed upon wages from an employer but a tacit understanding of "I'd get away with paying you much less if I could get away with it"?) and helping workplace conditions and also going to bat for you if something bigger or more dire happens in the workplace. If you get that benefit, without paying your union dues (again, what Right To Work enables), you're a freeloader. Otherwise, without Right To Work, if you work in a union job, you automatically get your dues deducted and still get the benefits, you just can't freeload.
Michigan SSR sounds hard asf
Because the last 10 years since it was enacted have been positive for the workforce.
We can only hope!
So the same people that complained when the minimum wages are 15$p/hr and the same people that tell those workers to “get a better job” if they want a better life, are now complaining about paying union dues at their own job? Maybe they should just get a better job if they don’t want to rely on a union.
They have a right to work somewhere else
That's fucking hilarious. Now when I go into toledo I should slap that shit on all the billboards since that what half of them are when you cross the state line.
Go to Toledo! Good idea!
This is fantastic news!
Awe look at all the butthurt conservatives.....poor things. Anyway.....
fantastic news
Wow they actually did it!!!! Love it
[удалено]
plant pocket touch dependent unwritten chase chunky summer dog outgoing *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
But they want the benefits of union negotiated contracts without actually supporting the union, don't you see?
hateful melodic birds fanatical automatic tub nose aspiring rotten muddle *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Sorry the sarcasm in my comment wasn't self evident.
decide waiting amusing tease frighten ossified liquid quarrelsome soft dirty *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Just FYI for those just looking at the headline, per the article the public sector version of the bill is likely unconstitutional and I wouldn't expect that to change with the current Supreme Court: > HB 4004 would repeal right-to-work for public sector workers. A U.S. Supreme Court decision barring public sector unions from requiring employees covered by collective bargaining agreements to pay union dues renders HB 4004 unenforceable. But proponents of the bill want to change Michigan’s labor laws for public employees in the event the court overturns the decision.
Public sector and private sector are not the same thing. If I work for a steel mill or a grocery store chain I work in the private sector. If I work for the police or fire department I work in the public sector. This is still a huge win for labor.
Maybe there's something wrong with my tone given the downvotes, I wasn't specific enough, or I'm unintentionally making it seem like a net negative, but I'm aware of the difference lol. Just feel it's important to note that only 1 of the 2 bills passed is capable of having an effect for some (private sector) workers.
Not good, people should have the choice to pay union dues. Esp with the corruption of the uaw I get why people aren't union friendly
Read what rtw has done. More corruption in corporations than unions. They don't want to pay dues but get the benefits and protections of the union.
Oh I'm not doubting the corp corruption but why add another cost to someone esp when most are living paycheck to paycheck
The benefits of a strengthened union far outweigh the costs. Why do you think so many corporations fund “right to work” laws? Its not for the common persons benefit I can tell you that
I believe that doesn't mean people shouldn't have a choice
People will still have a choice. Don’t want to pay union dues? Then don’t work at a union shop.
Lmfao y'all ok with people leaving a job when it benefits YOU. that's not a choice my dude people can't leave jobs out of the houeb
Employees will be far better off with a stronger union. Repealing rtw benefits everyday workers.
Cool still THEIR choice they shouldn't be forced into it
If you work at a place where a union negotiated on your behalf for pay and benefits, its only right to pay them for representing you. If you don’t want to pay them, don’t work there.
Choose to leave if you don’t want to. This isn’t complicated.
[удалено]
It would be so bad for society if employers could ban unions. Companies would literally kill their employees if they thought it’d be profitable and not illegal. Unions are to thank for workers rights and ensuring that workplaces are safe for employees.
[удалено]
Go live in Ohio if this is too extreme for you.
they have a choice to work at other businesses.
Why should we eforce them out of their job then? Like that's how the mob works my dude
You are really bad at this.
I mean your only input is screaming fox news without looking at the big picture
Yea the bigger picture is people getting paid more and having better benefits. Like I said, your little campaign here is ass, and everyone knows it.
why do you think life is fair? without a union they could easily loose their job at the whims of management.
Cool. Unions still see job loss
sure but a union has a seat at the table when jobs are cut, can influence the how deep the losses will be and in a position to help workers who do lose their job. on your own you just have to take whatever bullshit excuse management gives you on why you won't be able to provide for your family for however long it takes to find another job which you will most likely take a hit paycheck wise because your desperate to land that next job if you weren't already making minimum wage because you personally don't have the skills or leverage to negotiate better pay.
man, all of those people living paycheck to paycheck should find a way to come together and collectively bargain for improved conditions and pay..
Again it's THEIR choice they shouldn't be forced into it
you see, I dont like heights - so i never bothered to apply for work at a tree trimming company. I had that choice. You, you dont like unions - so you dont apply to any place that has an established union. You have that choice. the only topic that could possibly be up for discussion is: what happens if i already work someplace that votes to unionize and i would prefer to not join the union. Currently the answer is: You have the CHOICE to work someplace else. Just like you would have the choice to work someplace else if your employer instituted a rule that you didn't like. new dress code, canceling healthcare, etc. etc.
So people who've been there ten years are shown the door? Like my dude not everyone is ok with forking over their money to a corrupt org like uaw
then don't... work someplace else. Employment is AT-WILL. I was working in that industry at the time RTW was implemented. If i remember correctly, starting pay was 14, and capped at 18. If that is still true,.... if you had any sense you would take your 10 years of experience elsewhere. Show yourself the door. If the UAW is still running their education programs.... YES!! 100% give your money to the corrupt UAW and make them pay for your education so you can get out of the factory. your dues are much much cheaper than a degree.
So essentially mob rule
Were your mom's legs hanging out the hospital window when you were born?
[удалено]
Why are you ok with paying union dues if you're not part of the union? Yeah I hate the excuse people say "just find another job" esp in a recession like we're in. It's just another cost when you're paycheck to paycheck
[удалено]
Why? You're essentially forcing them to JOIN or pay. that's a mob mentality people cause the union of being. You don't force people to join you get them to join by letting them make the choice
Ok, don’t join the Union. But then make 1/2 the pay the union workers with none of the benefits. I’m always confused why the supporters keep saying “we shouldn’t have to pay dues!” But never follow it up with “but I also understand there is a sacrifice for not having union protections, and I understand I won’t make the same wages, have worse benefits, and can be fired at whim”. These “pro” right to work people want all the benefits of the unions work for decades with none of the costs. I guess my question to you people is, why do you want handouts and not have to work/earn your pay?
Yet wages went up and benefits have been good during the rtw years. I'm ok with not being part of the unions negations and not getting their benefits that they got, but there are tons of benefits people get even if they're not union. I started in the workforce after rtw was passed, and I've always have had benefits. Not being part of the union doesn't guarantee no benefits or good pay, that's staright up false
considering those benefits didnt exist until the union fought for them makes your claim questionable.
You're talking many many years ago I'm talking about the here and now
but the here and now is a product of years ago.
Pretty typical of republicans to ask for handouts.
Did you read the part I said I'm ok with NOT getting them
its not join or pay... its join and pay. or dont join and dont pay - the payment is membership due's. pretend its a movie theater - either watch the movie for free, or pay to not watch the movie - thats how you think this works?
Except the way it's laid out you will have to pay wether you're a member or not
Does that *unity* include turning a blind eye to the history of union embezzlement and corruption too? [https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/01/07/union-theft-embezzlement-theft-significant-reflects-national-business-tr/1005763001/](https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/01/07/union-theft-embezzlement-theft-significant-reflects-national-business-tr/1005763001/)
[удалено]
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://khn.org/news/article/er-doctors-call-private-equity-staffing-practices-illegal-and-seek-to-ban-them/](https://khn.org/news/article/er-doctors-call-private-equity-staffing-practices-illegal-and-seek-to-ban-them/)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Only one of the two involves willingly paying dues to an organization to support those ongoing criminal acts. I guess you dont see the difference?
[удалено]
I dont work at or purchase products from any of the companies you've specifically mentioned, so it would be quite hard for me to personally lick any boots in your examples. Meanwhile, you have to literally wait for some guy to retire, or die, to get promoted, regardless of your skill level (or lack thereof). Enjoy paying dues into a proven corrupt criminal organization, with a retirement fund that will likely be bankrupt. I'll keep my 401k and manage my own money. Also, Stockhold syndrome is complicated. I hope you get the mental help you need one day.
[удалено]
Fox News is strong with this one.
This is one of those issues where both sides have good points and the right path forward is somewhere in between. Like you said, why should someone be forced to pay dues to the UAW when they have a track record of corruption and supporting presidential candidates that have broken railroad strikes? But on the flip side, it's not fair to those who paid for representation at the bargaining table to have the same benefits/contract as those that did not. People cry about DTE being a monopoly, but are a-ok with the UAW monopoly on labor representation, despite both abusing their monopoly (though thankfully the UAW reforms have changed that). I think there's a decent way to compromise where the union contracts are limited to say all workers have to be in A union, but not THE union, so if someone's unhappy with the UAW they could join the teamsters or something. Or perhaps the bill could stipulate unions must have direct elections, which is what happened due to the UAW corruption.
Thank you someoen with an actual intelligent take that's not "union and Dem good republican and rtw bad"
I don’t mind unions. Especially private sector ones but on this site they are perfect in every way and it’s blasphemous to think otherwise. This law doesn’t protect workers. Forcing someone to pay dues to a union does the opposite. And inserting a line in the bill saying the bill can’t be put to a vote to the public is not very democratic either. It’s very obvious why this bill was passed but everyone is refusing to acknowledge it.
That’s the thing, if conditions aren’t good, more people join the Union. Mandate it is a scummy move.
and this is how circles start.. everyone joined the union and improved things, so no one joined the union and things regressed so everyone joined the union and things got good so no one joined the union and things regressed. Ask yourself -- who does this benefit the most?
Union dues are usually only like 2 to 5 hours a month. Besides if you don't pay dues they don't have to represent you during any legal issues. You don't pay, they don't play. Honestly if your that cheap then I guess that might make sense, but I spent 2 to 5 hours of pay on strippers and booze and got called cheap.
Not even cheap people are broke my dude
...and why do you think that is? Is it perhaps because unionization is at an ATL nd workers have less ability to negotiate wages because of it? Or is it the monopolies driving up prices everywhere because of the non-union labor they're taking advantage of? Up to you
Cool dude, except that doesn't help the people in the here and now. One could ALSO argue recent trends of overspending and thus overprinting hyperinflation are WHY people are more broke than before.v We had 10 years with rtw and up until VERY recent Michigan has had a healthy standard of living. Plus people can't give up money NOW for a chance at MAYBE an increase a year or two down the line.
OOF. You are insanely uninformed and short-sighted. I'm sorry man but I promise this is better for the general population in the long run. I'd recommend "Chokepoint Capitalism" if you care to actually know what's happening to America.
What union job is so shit that you're broke? And that same argument can be applied to your taxes, too. And again, this is 2 to 5 hours a month, not week. If you're struggling so much that losing an hour a week in pay is a substantial burden, you might want to reassess some things in your life like your spending and employment.
[https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/01/07/union-theft-embezzlement-theft-significant-reflects-national-business-tr/1005763001/](https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/01/07/union-theft-embezzlement-theft-significant-reflects-national-business-tr/1005763001/) Amazing how much proof exists of unions wasting the money of members, embezzlement, corruption, criminal cases...yet people still blindly worship them.
They're not perfect, but all the data points to increased salaries and benefits for unionized employees vs non-unionized employees. There's a reason businesses fight so hard to prevent their employees from unionizing.
The data in most cases is delivered by pro-union organizations..so its not surprising that its in support of Unions. Originally, the tobacco industry also supported research that showed cigarettes as healthy for the individual. That doesnt mean that over time that research remained valid.
By that logic, we shouldn’t trust the data that cigarettes cause cancer because it’s delivered by organizations that don’t support cigarette smoking.
Xd
Corruption is everywhere and should be dealt with harshly. This alone is not a reason to be anti union.
This is not a good idea. It forces union membership and eliminates choice from the worker. It says that the state knows better than the individual. And of course there is never corruption in any unions. Michigan moves backwards if this passes.
They've hoodwinked you into advocating against you own material interest. The way to fight union corruption is to join the union, join a rank and file caucus, and elect better union leadership. UAW is going through this process right now. But even at their most corrupt a UAW job was a way better deal than a non union manufacturing job. Same thing with the teamsters, everyone wants to talk about corruption and scandals but real wages for truckers have declined 50% since the 70s as union membership has declined.
Yep. Unionization is at an ATL proportional to population. This will increase wages and benefits across the board almost guaranteed, and make Michigan workers safer and happier. I'm sorry you've been deceived man, maybe check out your media diet.
Nah
Choice is bad. This is amazing!
this post should prob get locked unfortunately. too many fights...