Wisconsin to be 25th RTW state!

[Jhhnn]

Unions are workers standing up for their rights.
Real market value of labor is higher if workers negotiates as a group than when workers negotiate individually. If Wisconsinites want to reduce their negotiating leverage against the corporations, they can, but they should understand that they are making themselves cheaper labor in the process. Maybe that's all they deserve, they know their worth better.

They're just joining the race to the bottom. It'd be OK if they weren't dragging everybody else down with them.

 

[crashtech]

Unions are workers standing up for their rights.
Real market value of labor is higher if workers negotiates as a group than when workers negotiate individually. If Wisconsinites want to reduce their negotiating leverage against the corporations, they can, but they should understand that they are making themselves cheaper labor in the process. Maybe that's all they deserve, they know their worth better.

Unions are groups of individuals acting in concert to protect the interests of the group. If a union is able to monopolize the supply of labor, there can be no fair market value established. I don't really have a problem with any of that in the general case, but I do like to see things for what they really are.

 

[inachu]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-wisconsin-right-to-work-20150306-story.html


Exactly right. The old industrial age thinking is going away as it should. For those that want to cling to it, fine have your union but don't force others to pay for it.
And before some idiot comes in and starts talking out of his ass about the union being forced to represent non-union members - try again. The union doesn't have to be formed as an exclusive unit, they have the option not to. Look it up and educate yourself...

Win for Wisconsin and a win for worker freedom!

Unions served their purpose but now hiring illegals and contractors are bypassing those old laws making them work over time with no over time pay and getting only 1 day off a week. Yes it will be as before unions forcing people to work more for less and making sure americans do not work because they cost too much.

Soon contracting will be made illegal or be modified. 92 million americans out of work and they are not all lazy gimmedat poor people.

On the other had the gimmiedat lobby for the rich 1% will see their day coming.

Already seeing the abuse 2 years ago that video by lawyers and hr firms on HOW NOT TO HIRE AMERICANS in America.

 

[crashtech]

They're just joining the race to the bottom. It'd be OK if they weren't dragging everybody else down with them.

I don't think it is fair to characterize anyone with a differing opinion as joining some race to the bottom. It is one way to try and stifle an honest debate.

 

[senseamp]

Unions are groups of individuals acting in concert to protect the interests of the group. If a union is able to monopolize the supply of labor, there can be no fair market value established. I don't really have a problem with any of that in the general case, but I do like to see things for what they really are.

Same applies to corporations. They are groups of much richer individuals acting to protect their group interests. That's why unions are necessary, to level the playing field. That said, it may be the case that Wisconsinite and other RTW state citizens are simply not worth union wages and benefits, due to lack of education or intelligence, low productivity, etc. In such case, they may have no choice but to vote to make themselves cheaper labor, because they are simply not worth bothering with otherwise.

 

[Darwin333]

No one is being forced into a Union Job.

I thought that at least certain places of employment that you were forced to join the union and pay fees. If you mean you aren't forced to work for a company that is unionized then the opposite argument holds true as well.

 

[crashtech]

Same applies to corporations. They are groups of much richer individuals acting to protect their group interests. That's why unions are necessary, to level the playing field. That said, it may be the case that Wisconsinite and other RTW state citizens are simply not worth union wages and benefits, due to lack of education or intelligence, low productivity, etc. In such case, they may have no choice but to vote to make themselves cheaper labor, because they are simply not worth bothering with otherwise.

I agree with the first two sentences of your post. But I'm not convinced that corporations in general are colluding to drive down the cost of labor any more than anybody who needs to purchase labor. It's natural to seek out good value, so it's not inherently evil to want to find the right skills at the best price. The real reason unions exist is to monopolize the labor supply, so that an artificially high cost can be maintained. I don't really have a problem with that if they can get away with it, but in the long view it serves to make our country a much less competitive place in which to do business.

 

[Darwin333]

Private Companies take the result of their Employees labour and support Politicians that Workers may or may not support already.

labor for which said employees are compensated for. There is a huge difference between using money that you earned and taking and using money that someone else earned.

 

[Darwin333]

Like I said, if a Worker despises Unions, they already have the choice of joining a non-Union workplace. No freedom has been gained.

And workers still have a choice of joining a unionized workplace. Your argument defeats itself.

 

[senseamp]

I agree with the first two sentences of your post. But I'm not convinced that corporations in general are colluding to drive down the cost of labor any more than anybody who needs to purchase labor. It's natural to seek out good value, so it's not inherently evil to want to find the right skills at the best price. The real reason unions exist is to monopolize the labor supply, so that an artificially high cost can be maintained. I don't really have a problem with that if they can get away with it, but in the long view it serves to make our country a much less competitive place in which to do business.

Corporations are themselves groups of wealthy individuals joining forces for many reasons, including higher leverage when hiring labor. I don't blame them for finding the best deal. Again, it's for the workers to decide if they also want the best deal through collective bargaining, or if they aren't worth the higher pay and benefits, and have to settle for what they can get. RTW states are RTW for a reason. If they were desirable labor at union wage and benefit levels, they would not have to go RTW. But generally hiring these people with full union wages and benefits is not worth the money, compared to hiring someone in China for a lot less. So they do what they can to make themselves somewhat more competitive with third world labor.

 

[crashtech]

Something to consider is that contrary to popular belief, a large business can drive up the cost of labor just by existing. As a small business owner, I have a difficult time finding skilled labor at any price because the big guys already have the people worth having. And this is happening in an area with no union presence.

 

[senseamp]

Something to consider is that contrary to popular belief, a large business can drive up the cost of labor just by existing. As a small business owner, I have a difficult time finding skilled labor at any price because the big guys already have the people worth having. And this is happening in an area with no union presence.

So people aren't rushing to learn the skills necessary or move to your state to get unstable, low paying , and/or benefitless non-union jobs? You could have knocked me over with a feather.

 

[Jhhnn]

I don't think it is fair to characterize anyone with a differing opinion as joining some race to the bottom. It is one way to try and stifle an honest debate.

Louis Brandeis used the term long ago-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_to_the_bottom

It's a whole lot more accurate than the "Freedumb!" being waved around.

 

[crashtech]

So people aren't rushing to learn the skills necessary or move to your state to get unstable, low paying , and/or benefitless non-union jobs? You could have knocked me over with a feather.

Aren't you being a bit presumptuous? Also, in your rush to be insulting, you seem to be tacitly admitting that stable corporate jobs might not be so bad.

 

[senseamp]

Aren't you being a bit presumptuous? Also, in your rush to be insulting, you seem to be tacitly admitting that stable corporate jobs might not be so bad.

I have a stable corporate engineering job. But if you are on the production line, there is no such thing as a stable non-union corporate job. Something as simple as another country's central bank devaluing its currency can send your job overseas in no time.

 

[Jhhnn]

I have a stable corporate engineering job. But if you are on the production line, there is no such thing as a stable non-union corporate job. Something as simple as another country's central bank devaluing its currency can send your job overseas in no time.

Or send it off to Wisconsin, racing for the bottom.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Site based unions cover everyone in a bargaining unit at a given worksite, there is no other legal definition for them under the law. The are, by definition, the exclusive bargaining agent, the contract covers all people in the bargaining unit be they members or not, and they have a duty to represent everyone. Its been the law since 1935. So regardless of whether a shop is "open" or "closed" (those terms are not completely accurate anymore), everyone is represented.

The two guys you mentioned are members of a craft union. These are specialized unions for skilled trades that require months of extensive training, an apprenticeship period, and certification. Its a great model, but it doesn't apply to grocery clerks, for example.

There may be other models, but they have no legal standing under the NLRA and therefore management is under no legal obligation to recognize them nor negotiate with them.

You can continue to think it can't be done but it most certainly could be done under current regulation. Unions choose not to due to power reasons. Thier choice thus requires them to do certain things.(like represent non-members)
btw, the 2 guys are not specialists in anything really. No training, apprenticeship, etc. More of a general labor type union.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Unions served their purpose but now hiring illegals and contractors are bypassing those old laws making them work over time with no over time pay and getting only 1 day off a week. Yes it will be as before unions forcing people to work more for less and making sure americans do not work because they cost too much.

Soon contracting will be made illegal or be modified. 92 million americans out of work and they are not all lazy gimmedat poor people.

On the other had the gimmiedat lobby for the rich 1% will see their day coming.

Already seeing the abuse 2 years ago that video by lawyers and hr firms on HOW NOT TO HIRE AMERICANS in America.

I do contract work as I run my own small biz. My first "hires" will be contract "employees". All my agreements with outside companies that I do $/hr work for have OT clauses and other such items. Granted this is professional engineering/programming but my agreements arent that different than a friend of mine who runs a property maintenence biz which is really just low skill mowing,snow removal,light maintenence,and etc. He has "contract employees" too.

Contracting will never become illegal.

 

[trenchfoot]

I agree with the first two sentences of your post. But I'm not convinced that corporations in general are colluding to drive down the cost of labor any more than anybody who needs to purchase labor. It's natural to seek out good value, so it's not inherently evil to want to find the right skills at the best price. The real reason unions exist is to monopolize the labor supply, so that an artificially high cost can be maintained. I don't really have a problem with that if they can get away with it, but in the long view it serves to make our country a much less competitive place in which to do business.

Being competitive dictates that that will never happen. And your use of the phrase "artificially high" is wholly subjective and an opinion that seems to me to be rather difficult to defend.

Balance is the operative word in all (with exceptions of course) contract negotiations between union and management, of which there are too many shining examples to enumerate whereby companies make a decent profit and their unionized workers make a decent living wage. That of course can only exist if management sees their employees as vital assets to be dealt with fairly and if employees see the company they work for as vital to their job security and future prosperity. That precise example exists all over our country with or without having unions being involved, as some of those companies are so conscientious toward their workers that there is absolutely no need for unions to be involved, while other companies acquire parity between workers and management because unions are involved.

If government, especially a gov't that got corrupted by those who seek to tip the balance that existed between corporate profit and equitable workforce compensation in favor of higher profit, which is exactly what RTW laws do, then I would agree with you that there then exists an artificial component in the relationship between labor and management, but it's entirely in management's favor.

This is heavy-handed government intervention in the affairs of business at it's worst. Something that conservatives regularly rail against, yet seem perfectly fine with when higher corporate profits are prioritized over the welfare of the workers that are an obviously essential factor in the success or failure of any business, especially where a large workforce is involved.

And from my experience, management will always have the upper hand in any contract negotiations with their workers via their ability to dictate company policies, agenda and goals.

 

[crashtech]

If government what? I can't make sense of your post.

And I would like to beg pardon for viewing the labor force on a macro scale; what seems self-evident from such a view that Americans in general and union workers in particular live in a kind of artificially maintained bubble of high living standards. Knowing the requirements of such a lifestyle relative to the way the majority of the world's population lives, it seems more prudent to learn to live more modestly than to demand more of the same, to learn to be competitive instead of demanding to be shielded from the effects of inexorable globalism. But that's just my opinion, of course.

 

[trenchfoot]

If government what? I can't make sense of your post.

And I would like to beg pardon for viewing the labor force on a macro scale; what seems self-evident from such a view that Americans in general and union workers in particular live in a kind of artificially maintained bubble of high living standards. Knowing the requirements of such a lifestyle relative to the way the majority of the world's population lives, it seems more prudent to learn to live more modestly than to demand more of the same, to learn to be competitive instead of demanding to be shielded from the effects of inexorable globalism. But that's just my opinion, of course.

Hmmm...and here I thought I made myself perfectly clear.

Well, all I can say is that what you see as an artificially maintained bubble, I see as a real macro world situation brought on by actual agreed upon and real settled negotiations between labor and management where both walked away with things they wanted and other things they didn't get....You know, balance. This taking into account that those companies and unions who have struck contract agreements have already taken into account their situation on the global market (well, the ones that do compete globally, as some don't) before settling and surmised that within the auspices of the agreement, they are still able to compete on a global scale, make a decent profit for the company whilst disbursing compensation to those covered workers such that it won't harm the company's competitiveness and future prosperity.

That's what bargaining is all about, isn't it?

 

[Tombstone1881]

Why do conservatives hate the working class?

Wisconsin just bought themselves wage stagnation and wage reversal. They have also taken away workers rights.

Now a worker can be fired any time for any reason. In fact, the employer doesn't even have to give a reason for the firing.

RTW only helps the corporations and works against the American worker. It is unbelievable how someone who is not a business owner can applaud such a move. You workers that are applauding this move are shooting yourselves in the foot.

 

[dainthomas]

Time for Republicans to now fight for the right of kids to work. If a ten year old wants to work in a coal mine for 15 hours a day they should have the freedom to do so. Won't someone think of the children!

 

[BoberFett]

Holy shit, this thread is proof that the left is becoming unhinged, just like the right. Listen to all the left wing crazies.

 

[Adams200]

The corporate rulers and their political puppets are good at pitting one group of working class voters against another. This is the trick to their power.