Right-To-Work: Without unions, employers would abuse us

Tagged:  

Without unions, employers would abuse us
http://letters.ocregister.com/2011/07/07/without-unions-employers-would-...
July 7th, 2011
-HUNTINGTON BEACH, Patti Worley:
The July 6 letter, “The union bluster” was interesting. Usually anti-union opinion is that unions should be abolished because they have far too much power and obtain too many benefits for their members. The writer of this letter argues that since the grocery workers union has so little power (it has only been able to raise the average grocery workers wage $2 above minimum wage) unions should be abolished. He also implies that paying skilled workers $2 above minimum wage involves extortion.

Admittedly, unions have all the problems of any organization but, like most organizations, they also serve a purpose. I don’t understand how any employed person can reasonably call for the abolishment of unions unless they would be willing to give up the protections obtained through past union activism. Is there really someone out there who would prefer to go back to the 16-hour work days, 80-hour work weeks and unsafe working conditions that were prevalent until the rise of unions in the late 19th and early 20th century? What employee would really give up minimum-wage guarantees, overtime pay, protection from forced labor and laws that prohibit child labor?

I understand that, at times, the laws concerning workers’ rights and workplace safety conditions can be confusing and unwieldy, but they did not arise out of nowhere. They came about because of employers’ past abuses of power and focus on profit-making that finally caused employees to band together and demand improved working conditions. That movement is what enabled this country to develop the strong, powerful middle class that has proved to be the strength and backbone of modern American society.

I tire of the generalized acceptance of mindless union-bashing from so many people and the media. Is there really anyone naive enough to believe that the corporate world would not quickly revert to 19th century employment practices if current labor protection laws were abandoned and if workers could not join together to ensure that their employers follow those laws?

Your rating: None Average: 1 (1 vote)

After fighting his illegal firing in court Coca-Cola was forced to pay Mr. Smiesko over $800. Ignore the part about the union being involve in him getting fired, it's not germane to the topic of union protecting the rights of workers.

Keith Smiesko of Saxonburg won $3,356.46 from Teamster Local 585 union officials and $819.54 from Coca-Cola after he was illegally fired from his job for exercising his rights under the Foundation-won Supreme Court precedent in Communication Workers v. Beck, which allows workers to refrain from full-dues-paying union membership.

Earlier this year, Teamster Local 585 union officials ordered Smiesko – who had refrained from full union membership and dues payments – to immediately pay full union dues for the previous three years along with additional union initiation fees without ever notifying him that he was being charged for their so-called "representation." Union officials illegally threatened Smiesko with job termination if he did not pay.

Smiesko refused to pay, and Teamster Local 585 union officials demanded that Coca-Cola fire him. Coca-Cola complied with the union bosses' demand. With Foundation assistance, Smiesko then filed federal unfair labor practice charges against the union and company with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Pittsburgh.

In addition to the monetary settlement, Smiesko was reinstated to his job with Coca-Cola, and union and company officials agreed to post a notice in the workplace for workers who may want to exercise their Foundation-won rights to refrain from full-dues-paying union membership.

"No worker should ever be extorted by union bosses to join or pay dues to a union in order to get or keep a job," said Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work. "Pennsylvania desperately needs Right to Work protections for its workers to strip from union bosses the power to compel workers to give up some of their hard-earned money in order to provide for their families."

Despite the Court precedent in Beck, union bosses can still force workers who refrain from formal union membership to pay part of union dues because Pennsylvania does not have a Right to Work law. However, workers cannot be compelled to pay the portion of union dues used for the union’s political, lobbying, and member-only activities.

If enacted, a Right to Work law would end compulsory union dues by making union membership and dues payment strictly voluntary. Polls consistently show that 8 in 10 Americans support the Right to Work principle. Twenty-two states have already passed Right to Work protections for their workers.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

Paul, you had to go to Orange County, CA to find someone who supports your idea? And you use an opinion, a letter-to-the-editor that you put forward as if it's fact?

If what you and Patti describe as true then there is rampant abuse in every right to work state? That is the logic behind it is it not. So why post the opinion, why not post actual news stories on the abuse?

MikeyA

I only posted this because your Hate radio program cut off caller Julie (8:30 AM) today when she was winning a right-to-work argument with you. Oh your call screener Deb assured me that this was not the case, you were up against a break but I know you rambled on for another thirty seconds talking over Julie when see had you cornered. Fred you were looking like a fool! Why not invite her to continue after the break? Don't give me the BS that you ran out of time. This is why so many literate Speedy occasional listeners laugh at you and Brian Wilson. Its just soooo transparent!

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

"This is why so many literate Speedy occasional listeners laugh at you and Brian Wilson." No one listens more than you wolfie.

You claim everyone on here who is on the right gets their info from Right Wing media but you listen to it more than anyone else on here. Maybe if your turned off your dial you'd lose your obsession with Fred and if you read news stories instead of the opinion pages you might develop some principles and let them determine how you feel on issues.

MikeyA

Really, Wolfie?

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/11/07/the-democratic-national-convention...

"Big Labor has been a significant part of the Democratic coalition since — oh, I don’t know — the birth of Big Labor. So, it must have come as a shock to the union bosses who’ve fought unusually furiously for “middle class principles” in one of this year’s biggest political battles — the state-by-state fight to reduce state employee pensions and other benefits — when the Democratic National Committee selected a prominent city in a right-to-work state as the seat of the 2012 Democratic National Convention.

No matter, though: Democrats had a plan. Led by Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx (“a Democrat with close ties to Obama,” The Daily Caller calls him), they would simultaneously feast on Charlotte’s nonexistent barbecue and roll in out-of-state union workers to replace local non-union workers. Ideally, they would do it undetected, so nobody in Charlotte would feel affronted and union bosses would be secretly pleased.

One problem: Republican mayoral challenger Scott Stone has been on to Foxx for some time now. At a recent press conference, Stone asked Foxx to pledge not to give convention jobs to out-of-state workers — but Foxx evaded.

Now, reports have surfaced that show Foxx and the other organizers of the Democratic National Convention have, in fact, discriminated against non-union shops in Charlotte.

The beauty of capitalism is such that the DNC can do what it wants. Nothing says convention organizers have to hire non-union workers. The typical advantage to non-union shops is that they keep labor costs low. If organizers want to pay more to retain the political support of major union bosses, that’s their prerogative. But one of the immutable laws of life is that decisions have consequences — and we can rarely have it “both ways.” In this case, Foxx risks upset constituents in Charlotte voting him out of office next Tuesday — and the president risks upsetting his host city and an important swing state."

-------------------

Here's the bottom line, Big Labor Unions don't give a crap about middle class values. What they care about is retaining their political power. Why else would unions from all over the country spend $30 million dollars in Ohio over SB 5? You can yak all you want about the evils of big corporations throwing their weight and money around to get their way; but you're a bleeping hypocrite if you don't recognize that big labor unions do the exact...same...thing.

Big corporations. Big Unions. No difference.

This entire week has been a stunning display of institutional arrogance from Penn State to big corporations and big unions facing off in Ohio over SB 5. When people are more concerned about protecting the entity versus doing the right thing and protecting people with no power from grade school kids from a sexual predator to disenfranchised citizens who have no representation in their own government thanks to big unions and big corporations money, it says everything with what's wrong not only with our society but with our country.

Big unions don't care about the fact that people continue to lose their homes at a staggering rate. Big unions don't care about middle America drowning symptomatically as the cost of living rises. If they did care, they would have made the Democrats pay dearly for President Clinton signing off on NAFTA and starting the chain reaction towards the two Americas and the slow destruction of middle America we have today.

I mean, we already know where big corporations stand. Sweetheart deals that leave them paying little or no taxes. Anyone remember the AIG jerks who after we bailed big banks out (and we shouldn't have), went on the 200K retreat? But big unions claim they are for the workers, middle class America. That could not be further from the truth.

Money. Power. Entitlement. It's not just a big corporation value anymore.

I am completely for 'Right to work' laws.

Political Championship Wrestling- putting politics in proper perspective by presenting it as pro wrestling.

Coming in January, a political satire about the sorry state of American Politics- Jesusland vs. Progressiveville.

Nor would I ever be - I value my soul. and Ive never been abused.

BUT - BOTH my parents were in unions, and both felt abused by them.

Now it looks like Big Labor is going to spend 60 million more, of other peoples money, to fight this legislation.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2011/11/10/right-to-work-a...

Right-to-work: The Trojan Horse to poverty.
Anyone look at the working people of those right-to-work states and they'll see poverty. Many may have a job but most live with poverty and lousy schools. Don't be fooled by paid off right wing nut job talk show hosts talking up right-to-work. Its a loser for the working class!

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

Right to work: workers who don't fall in lockstep with the union's political agenda don't have to foot the bill for said political activity.

Right to work: the end of descrimination against non-union workers by a political system (see NRLB) and political party (see Democrats) who favors unions- see Charlotte, NC example and the South Carolina Boeing workers.

Political Championship Wrestling- putting politics in proper perspective by presenting it as pro wrestling.

Coming in January, a political satire about the sorry state of American Politics- Jesusland vs. Progressiveville.

than living in Toledo now? The city has the highest poverty of any urban city in America, and the school district leaves a lot to be desired? Yep, all the union influence sure has helped this town...

Here's a link to the language of the proposed amendment. I'd be interested in hearing what in this amendment is unfair to anyone. Not what you think might happen, or what you think I think might happen, just what do you see in the language that scares you, or gives you pause.
http://www.ohioconstitution.org/2011/11/01/workplace-freedom-amendment/

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

Is the "right" to terminate a baby the only choice that Democraps want Americans to have?

Or is it the "right" to kill a baby and the "right" to other peoples' money the only freedom of choice you get when you sell your mind to the Dimocrap party and to the soul-less slave masters of Union leadership?

I understand why bitchboy needs a Union. He doesn't have the spine, knowledge or cojones to make it through life on his own. He needs his Union brothers to wipe his arse and mommy gubberment to wipe his nose for him.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

"Is there really anyone naive enough to believe that the corporate world would not quickly revert to 19th century employment practices if current labor protection laws were abandoned and if workers could not join together to ensure that their employers follow those laws?"

You're tired? Let me tell you how I'm fucking tired of hearing frankly retarded blather like yours.

You have to compete with world labor. You don't have a choice in that. Either compete with low-wage earners in Mexico, China, Viet Nam and the like, or go and live under a bridge.

The real working class in the USA is the new middle class, and the real working class isn't unionized. So unionized labor is now an elite, as much as corporate executives are, to the rest of us, the real middle class. I don't ally with the elite.

The reality here can't be avoided. You can't use force of any kind to make employers pay you the outrageous amounts that heavily indebted and consuming Americans had come to expect. That's why those employers are fleeing to overseas. Since pricing in the USA is very sticky, there will be a period of remarkable worker suffering when compared to the latter 20th Century, but eventually prices will collapse in order to line up with the new, greatly diminished ability of the average U.S. worker to earn a wage.

In the longer term, as the cheap petroleum gives way to not-so-cheap petroleum, then finally expensive (or unavailable) petroleum, the globalist experiment will itself collapse, forcing capitalists to re-merge manufacturing with its consumption. But that will take too long, and legions of Americans must either suffer it out, bankrupt, get foreclosed, endure divorces, or just suicide. As the 21st Century advances, the % of Americans that will enjoy the 1995-2005 peak lifestyle will continue to drop. More and more manual labor jobs will return, since labor will then compete with expensive energy supplies. Manual farming must return to all the First World, so the able man of the year 2080 AD in our area (or what remains of it), can look forward to hard work performed in the fields of then-Ohio. He'll be able to feed himself and his family, but will afford little else.

That is the natural state of Humanity: Lots of labor just to feed ourselves in our huge numbers. Cheap petroleum allowed us a time when we could counter that necessity, but that era is over. The reality of the energy difficulties of keeping billions alive, is resurfacing.

But globalism is unstoppable and trying to stop it is foolish. To stop it, would require outright Fascism, but Fascism when invoked would only serve globalism anyway. I keep getting this impression, Wolfman, that you don't care about that, and just want to see government force used against capitalists, as some sort of Holy Grail. I'd even want to see that future come to pass, if only to enjoy the look of terror that will appear on your face and the screech of horror that will appear in your voice or text, as what you invoked turns on you in a short second (much like Obama did to most Democrats).

Or this...

Big business abuses created the need for reform. Thus the union movement and other government measures.

Now, big union abuses have created the need for reform. Thus the right to work movement and corresponding government measures.

It's no wonder that big unions are spending tens of millions of dollars of worker's dues to fight this every inch of the way. It's no wonder that big unions are trying to save their political power. Once upon a time, big business did the exact same thing.

Political Championship Wrestling- putting politics in proper perspective by presenting it as pro wrestling.

Coming in January, a political satire about the sorry state of American Politics- Jesusland vs. Progressiveville.

I want to publicly apologize for making Paul sound like a complete fool this morning on the radio. He hung up before we finished which saddened me, and he was unable to answer a single question without referring to me getting marching orders and WSPD forcing things at people. It will be podcast before the day is out so that you can hear it for yourself. Sorry Paul. Perhaps you can answer the question I asked you here on the board. How is it moral for someone to be forced into joining a union in order to be able to work, don't we all have the "right to work"?

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

The right to work is larger than that. To avoid hypocrisy, if unions have the right to organize, then workers have the right to not be in the union. You want to empower the workers, right, union guys? There's nothing more empowering than having full liberty.

After hearing that union slug I can’t wait to start working on passing
around the petitions to get signatures for the Right to work amendment.
Where can I get one??

Since the libs and unions refer us as tea baggers. Can we refer to them as douche baggers......

Paul W. is the poster child for the old saying "it is better to blog and be thought a fool than to call Fred's show and remove all doubt!"

Fred, Paul pointed out a great reason for union’s losing their grip. He said “when unions leave wages go down”. This points to the fact that most union jobs are way over paid for the market they are in. This is proven every time a company leaves the area. He also mentioned auto workers. The foreign auto makers never seem to have a problem with hiring. How do they do this without the UAW?? My guess they do it very well and without the BS of union contract negotiations.

Lines are busy! Paul is the perfect example of the "dumbing down of America."
Bring on the fairness doctrine, Paul can have his own program as counterpoint to Fred's.
That guy was/is a moron!

I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't just heard it. The Wolfman is even dumber than his postings on Swampbubbles would indicate.

I rest my case re. union thugs and slugs. Paul is a fine example. What a total nimrod.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

Well yesterday I called in defense of Julie (off air) knowing I wouldn't subject myself to the vindictive HATE radio machine of WSPD. Today to my surprise Julie calls again after yesterday's ill treatment by the smarmy Fred. So the Wolfman sprang to action to defend Julie's right to an opposing view, to set the record straight. Its not often that anyone calls the decidedly biased propagandized Speedy radio these days and offers any countering opinion. So the Wolfman knowing the odds of being ridiculed after the fact, gives his opinion and defense of Julie.

Well this is how WSPD handles those who offer a countering opinion. Follow the silly commentary that smarmy Fred and no doubt the afternoon mumbling goof attack me with without my being able to defend myself. This is why I and most people do not participate in the idiotic one-sided debate of WSPD.

This will be a lesson on how not to run a radio station. Especially one that purports to be a community talk radio station. Watch how the attack will continue for the next 24 hours.

Oh Fred when will Jerry Anderson be returning to the once great WSPD? You never answered my question.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

Wolfman, due to the magic of Internet technology, you can start your own community radio station, right in your own home. Streaming audio, interviews, advertising, the whole kit and kaboodle. When will you be starting that up? Got a link for us? Huh?

I hope Fred saved some of wolfies' rantings. Sometimes during a broadcast, it helps to have "background noise" playing. Like at the beginning, or ending of a commercial break, etc.. Maybe even mix a little in, with familiar Three Stooges clips? The possibilities are endless.

Here's the link, it's very simple and you won't get e mails from Karl Rove each morning telling you what to do, or phone calls in the middle of the night from the Koch brothers giving you tips. http://www.pcworld.com/printable/article/id,190705/printable.html
And I shouldn't do this but because I like you here's something you can use for an aircheck from this morning - http://www.wspd.com/cc-common/podcast/single_page.html?podcast=Fred

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

They seem to be doing OK. In my opinion the UAW is worthless. I was with them for six years and completely lost my respect for them. As far as I'm concerened, it's a good group to be in if you have little or no work ethic. If you have any real enthusiasm about your job it doesn't take long for them to make you listen to reason. "You don't want to kill the job do you".Half of the people I worked with were pretty lazy, always acting like they were overworked, but laughed at how simple their job really was.

AmericanPie

My father had the same experience. he actually got his job threatened for doing too much.

I wonder if any union worker even knows what a merit raise IS?

In june I toured a production facility, and there was one line where 5 guys worked. when we walked up to them, 4 guys came off the line and talked with us for about a half hour. During that time, the one remaining guy did all the work, and he was talking and cracking jokes the whole time... WTF did they need to be paying five guys for what one guy could do and not even bust his ass doing??

I worked at UPS. It was my third job.

My supervisor on the day shift loved me because I was a hard worker. I was given more trucks and even though I was a junior man I would be given chances to work a little bit later because I could get difficult items loaded fast but then the next day would allow me to leave early to keep the hours down. From him I had rave reviews.

I had to switch to the graveyard shift when school started back up. I was still working 3 jobs and going to school and my health started to deteriorate. About this time I had a personality conflict with my supervisor. We had a meeting with the head boss, he, myself, and my union steward to try to resolve the issue. The supervisor took the days where I left early and used them as derrogatory information towards me. I explained he was cherrypicking days, refused to look at the days where I worked later. All the while my union representative sat there quietly not saying anything until at one point I asked him "Are you going to say anything on my behalf?". After the meeting he explained to me the only reason he had the union steward job was because he was paid $.35 more an hour and was the first offered overtime. He didn't care about anyone other than himself and was a waste.

Only a few years later my father got screwed by a union he worked for for over 37 years. The company he worked for was the only one that treated him right.

Fuck unions they're only out for themselves and could give a shit about the workers.

MikeyA

Talking to union workers about the RTW provision is pretty pointless. I was actually told that RTW actually meant "right to work for less". Naturally, the idea that the company can always shut down and move to cheaper labor, escapes them.

Unions still believe in the face of all evidence to the contrary, that they still have monopoly power. It's bizarre, and about as delusional as the idea that we'll always have enough petroleum.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.