• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Anti-union group’s ad scores in Super Bowl

I don't have anything really negative about the ad itself. It was decently well done. I just in general have a distaste for that kind of stuff during the Superbowl.
 
The National Labor Relations Board does not protect certain employees.

employed as an independent contractor

yep. and here's the current situation : if you're looking for work, chances are (if you get hired) you'll be hired in as an "independent" contractor.

what it means : no vacation days, no sick days, and no benefits unless the contractor you are technically employed by offers them to you.

and no job security. most companies give you a maximum contract, and then you're out the door.

most of the jobs hiring in 2010 in my area were "independent" contract work. this is for someone with a graduate degree.
 
Last edited:
It is so nice to see the Union Thugs coming under scrutiny by the masses. Folks should be able to choose whether they want representation or not. They should be able to choose whether their union Dues supports the political candidates they want. Folks should also have the right to work free from union pressure to join their political organization. I can only hope this spreads from coast to coast. The taxpayers deserve to get a fair shake with the politicians that the unions routinely purchase for their own benefit.
I don't know about anyone else but I immediately disregard any thread that has "union thugs" in the OP. "Union thugh" is just a caricature and a stupid one at that. It lowers the intelligence of the conversation immediately and one can have an anti-union stance without having to resort to dated 1900's caricatures.
 
It is so nice to see the Union Thugs coming under scrutiny by the masses. Folks should be able to choose whether they want representation or not.

They already do.

They should be able to choose whether their union Dues supports the political candidates they want.

Union dues don't support political candidates, except internally, and that's a matter for union leadership like any other, which is democratically elected.

The taxpayers deserve to get a fair shake with the politicians that the unions routinely purchase for their own benefit.

The taxpayers vote, not unions.
 
And rightfully so. I negotiated labor contracts with labor unions for 12 years, I am very familiar with the beast. If the average union member only knew the deals made behind their backs and dues, they'd never pay dues again. I know of one deal where the Union negotiator got a set of keys for the owners ski lodge in Aspen CO to use anytime it was available in exchange for some major concessions in the contract they were negotiating. Oh I forgot the skydiving plane use too!

Such deals are illegal. You engaged in an illegal act if you negotiated this. And it is certainly not common. Of course, stockholders have to worry about business leaders being blatantly corrupt like this too, don't they?
 
And do what? As I said all the things including family medical leave are incorporated into current labor law. So again what is their purpose today besides what fishstyx said political fundraising?

You're full of crap if you think everything labor has is codified into law. Pay and benefits are ceratinly not.
 
Besides, non union members in a union shop must pay their fair share of the cost to negotiate contracts, just no extra for the unions political activities. How is that unfair?

But that's what the people in this ad want to get rid of.
 
Doesn't a right imply that you have a choice? For example the right to keep and bear arms.It implies that you have a choice in whether or not you want to keep and bear arms,it doesn't mean you are forced to a keep and bear arms. A closed shop means you have to join a specific union if you wish to have a certain job,you can't even pick or form another union if you don't like the one that is available

I wonder how many roads would be built if being taxed for them was optional but you still were allowed to drive on them...
 
Back
Top Bottom