You deflected instead of actually answering my question.Originally Posted by Ordie
Should workers have the right to choose not join a union and not pay dues in any company they work at? Yes or no.
No
Workers have the right to accept or decline a union represented job.
There are some union locals that will allow you to defer your union dues to a charity.
For clarification:
There are two types of union representation.
1) Open shop where everyone is represented upon acceptance of a job.
2) Closed shop where one must go through a guild (trade) before being considered for a job.
A Closed shop model is no different than a Bar Association.
Absolutely. They shouldn't however expect that when the union members get a gain, that they should get it too. They should be negoitating their own terms and conditions.
That is what I thought. You are for forcing workers to join a union and pay dues in order to work at a unionized company. You are against freedom of choice and freedom of association for those workers.
Fair enough.
No one is forcing an individual from accepting a union represented job or not.
That defeats the whole concept of collective bargaining.
I think we covered that point already.
So you agree there's free choice in this matter.
You never did answer my question about Bruce Lee?
Not really. It allows those that want collective bargaining (and if the union is good at it then surely they will be the majority) to have it. And it allows those that do not, to negotiate their own arrangements - which may or may not be superior to the union agreement. Either way it takes the duress out of the situation.
My Dad was a Teamster, because he was an owner operator and he kinda had to be back in the 70's. He didn't much care for the union. Figured they were all crooked. He was pretty much right.
My only personal experience with unions was when I worked for the DoD. Government employees are automatically in the union whether they want to be or not. When I was at Indian Head MD, the old timers would all opine about the bad old days, making black powder and other explosives is dangerous work and the workers were treated like sh*t. The union helped fix it.
By the time I got there the union was run by people with "thuggish" attitudes that didn't really do much except facilitate real/bogus/any ****** harassment claims if it embarrassed management. They enjoyed being able to be in meetings and say "f*ck you" to managers with impunity. They wasted money, they didn't improve anything and when I was caught up in a reduction in force, they did absolutely nothing to help me even though I was the only qualified person in my position.
Management tried to save my job more than they did. In fact one department head called her department head husband at another base and got me a job immediately.
Yeah...he was born in San Francisco.
Wouldn't it be easier for the employer to have one common medical and benefits package?
Negotiating individual contracts vs. collective bargaining for identical work is a headache for an employer.
Yes, sometimes it is preferable for the employer to have only one set to negotiate with rather than many. And in those circumstances they may indeed prefer to deal direct with the union. Be nice to have a choice though don't you think.?
Negotiating individual contracts certainly wasn't that big a PITA when NZ broke up the compulsary union membership back in the early 1990's. Most people still ended up with pretty much the same contract for the same work anyway. But it was good (for example) when I was negotiating my last contract that I was able to get some changes made to the intellectual property components of the standard contract. Others insert the right to call their manager "knobface"...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote