Let her negotiate her own pay and benefits.

Orwell would be so proud.

I bet she would like to stop paying for the newspaper too, if she could keep reading it.
Or expect everyone else on the bus to pay an extra nickle so she can ride for free.

Unions have to serve everyone in their purview.
Corporations do not.

Unions have to serve even those who do not pay for the service.
Corporations do not.

Unions have to have special elections in order to endorse a candidate by the union.
Corporations do not have to have an election in order for the corporation to endorse a candidate.

Unions have to have those elections to donate campaign money to a candidate.
Corporations do not.

Nice way to run a gun fight. Don't let your opponent have a gun, a knife, a stick, or a sign. Then yell: "Come on sucker!"

how is a government allowed to make a company provide legal services for free

I know this is from Wikipedia but this stuff has been going on for a long long time, I remember this because at the time I was in the Carpenters Local and there was talk of some scabs doing this:


All she is a freeloader in other terms she would be called a scab.

I want all of the benefits that a 50+ majority on union members negotiated but don't want to help pay to protect my brothers and sisters and the contract, in some ways its like going into a bank taking out a loan, and then saying I am not going to pay for -----------------------its all about her




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Workers_of_America_v._Beck



Honk-------------------for a political revolution Bernie 2016

It is about getting a Progressive President, U.S. Supreme Court, Congress, State and Local Legislatures

Democracy begins with you-------------------tag your it---------------Hartmann / Sanders

Democracy is not a spectator sport----------------------get involved------------------Hartmann

breaking unions to bits anyway they can.

and protections. Talk about the snake biting its benefactor.

I wonder if people in boats clubs, AAA, professional organizations and so on will be allowed to opt out of their mandatory dues because of this anti-person decision? We just paid our AAA dues and I think that if we need a tow, AAA should send a truck out of the goodness of their hearts. And I don't think doctors should pay their professional dues. Hell, they paid enough to get through college. Or CPAs. <sarcasm>

Let's look at the bigger picture--who needs the protections that organizations offer? We are all rich enough and smart enough to negotiate a fair wage, health insurance coverage, pension benefits, safety in our workplace, and vacation days. Just look at how successful the serfs were back in the day. <more sarcasm>

....of that turd Scalia. More freedumb please? Surreptitious cell phone footage to follow.....

...without paying dues for representation.

Why can't unions dictate in their negotiations that the wages and benefits they negotiate only apply to the union members? The employers can negotiate individually with non-union workers.

However, companies match union employees to non unionized locations. Maybe for just this reason (it weakens the union).

They would prefer to negotiate with one entity for all the workers, than negotiate with them individually, would be my guess.

People vote to get unions so that EVERYONE can benefit. If someone doesn't want to pay his/her union dues, than they should not be in the job location that they are in.

They cannot expect to get the union benefits without paying for them either. That is simply unfair.

hundreds? It must be easier to say no to an individual and risk losing one person than saying no to a union and risk losing hundreds or thousands of employees through a strike. I still don't get it.

You would have to hire more people to interrogate each and every one of those individuals. Those extra people cost money, not to mention the time that it would take.

job offer. Take it or leave it". They can't do that with a union representing many. Still puzzled.

My last employer was unionized and a large number of employees were non-members. They got the same pay and benefits as anyone else. Why? Because the company had no interest in negotiating with each of them individually. Once the union negotiated a rate and benefits, the company simply applied it to everyone. The LAST thing they wanted to do was waste untold thousands of dollars in employee time sitting down with each of the nonunion employees individually to work something else out.

Besides, they had one non-union employee who DID push an individual contract. She had a very specialized job and, in the end, was offered signifigantly more money than her union coworkers. You can probably imagine the shitstorm that followed....

SOURCE: AP/ Darron Cummings
Protestors outside the Indiana House of Representatives during the debate on a right-to-work law that ultimately passed.


https://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/labor/report/2012/02/02/11103/right-to-work-101/


By David Madland, Karla Walter, Ross Eisenbrey | Thursday, February 2, 2012

Download this issue brief (pdf) @ link.

What are right-to-work laws?

In states where the law exists, “right-to-work” makes it illegal for workers and employers to negotiate a contract requiring everyone who benefits from a union contract to pay their fair share of the costs of administering it. Right-to-work has nothing to do with people being forced to be union members.

Federal law already guarantees that no one can be forced to be a member of a union, or to pay any amount of dues or fees to a political or social cause they don’t support. What right-to-work laws do is allow some workers to receive a free ride, getting the advantages of a union contract—such as higher wages and benefits and protection against arbitrary discipline—without paying any fee associated with negotiating on these matters.

That’s because the union must represent all workers with the same due diligence regardless of whether they join the union or pay it dues or other fees and a union contract must cover all workers, again regardless of their membership in or financial support for the union. In states without right-to-work laws, workers covered by a union contract can refuse union membership and pay a fee covering only the costs of workplace bargaining rather than the full cost of dues.

There is scant evidence these laws create jobs, help workers, or are good for a state’s economy, as supporters claim. Instead, these laws weaken unions and thereby hurt workers, the middle class, and local economies. We present here a Right-to-Work 101 so that the debate over right-to-work laws proceeds based on the facts.

FULL story at link.