Printable View
Free Press article
"Has the time come for Michigan, one of the wellsprings of the American labor movement, to join 22 states in which employees can't be compelled to join unions or pay union dues?"
there's even a poll for your votes -
http://www.freep.com/article/20110918/NEWS15/109180490/Right-work-debate-fires-up-among-Michigan-lawmakers
Welcome to Texas
Stats show that, this is not good for the working population. I believe this has been discussed previously on Dyes.
Most of the top ten states with the highest poverty rates are "RTW" states. none of those with the lowest are.
But they have jobs, right? All that matters are jobs. It doesn't matter how much they pay or what the career path of these jobs are. As long as you have a job all will be well in your life.Quote:
Originally Posted by rb336
whoops -- forgot VA. it is a rtw state in the top-ten in income. of course, if you knock out the people who work in govt. or lobbying concerns, they would probably drop to the lowestQuote:
Originally Posted by rb336
Right To Work Sucks.
They do it in Flori-Duh and it's common for someone to be fired for anything and you have no recourse.
2 weeks from retirement? You're fired!
Shirt wrinkly? You're fired!
Boss's friend needs your job? You're fired!
You'll have No rights with "Right to Work". Fight it.
I think this is DOA.....
Ok. I know it's pointless to try and insert facts into one of these union/anti union pages, but you're wrong. The benefits of "right to work" are debatable but nothing about it eviscerates recognition of protected classes such as your senior citizen/ someone nearing retirement. Further Michigan [[for those of us NOT in the unionized sector) already operates under an at will employment scheme. Meaning as long as your employer does not fire you because you are a pregnant woman....or other protected class.. and assuming you do not have an employment contract or other such agreement defining your employment... they can walk in a fire you for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papasito
So again...hate to break it to the shrinking union population here, but welcome to the real world folks.
Bailey:
And everyone is sooo pleased with this arrangement, they feel working people don't need to be organized.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxx
If you feel wrongfully denied employment, or wrongfully terminated, or wrongfully passed over for promotion there are various means of redress. None are at all restricted under any "right to work" regime. However, sometimes unfair actions are not "wrongful". Life is unfair. Sometimes the boss's kid,nephew or mistress gets the job, raise, or promotion. If you're going to sit there and tell me that nepotisim and corrupt favoritism are absent from the union work force, i want what you're smoking.
Frankly the main failing of the organized labor movement was in allowing employment non discrimination and minimum wage laws to even be enacted. They wrote themselves out of the picture. Before, protecting the worker was the sole purview of the unions... now it's Title VII, the ADEA, ADA HIPPAA, ERISA....etc and a whole lot of hungry lawyers looking for 1/3 of any payout. Really the only groups NOT protected are gays and those with no distinguishable skill set.
I was with S.I.U. they enfroced nothing, All they want are dues.
Yeah and that sucks.Quote:
Originally Posted by bailey
You can get fired for no cause at all and you have zero recourse in a right to work state.
You have zero recourse in Michigan right now....if you're not in a union, not a protected class and/or fired for a legally impermissible reason, or don't have an employment contract. however, its not like arbitrary/no cause firings are even a remotely common event. There is always a reason. Just depends on your perspective on if you think it's justified or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papasito
The union's problem with right to work laws is it'll create a free rider problem. A whole lot of people will get the benefits of union negotiated contracts without paying dues. But of course, if it was such a benefit to be part of a union, one would gladly pay the dues...right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Papasito
It has absolutely nothing to do with right to work. Right to work only refers to whether or not employees have to belong to a union. Right to work does not control your recourse against an employer against such acts as you've mentioned.
What does control such recourse is whether or not your state recognizes 'at will' employment. Last time I checked, about 40 states recognized some form of at will employment [[Michigan was one). That essentially means any employee without an express or implied contract can be terminated for any reason that does not violate any pertinent law [[some of which bailey has pointed out). Obviously, if you belong to union then there is an express contract that should dictate the conditions under which your employment could be terminated.