dragondad
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2009
- Messages
- 541
- Reaction score
- 130
- Location
- Dallas-Ft.Worth
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Of course everyone has a right not to join a union.
But your real question is does a union have the right to keep those not in the union from performing the "contracted" work?
In States that have right-to-work laws...No..they are not allowed to that unless the industry fall under the Railroad Labor Act
22 States mostly in the South and West are right-to-work States....28 States are not.
Those who favor right-to-work will point to the economic growth in these States as they attract companies seeking to pay workers less.
On the other hand would they enjoy this advantage if every State was non right-to-work State?
Take Texas for instance. High growth State....but among the highest uninsured rates, low end on per capita income, per capita wealth, few Elite Universities for it's size, students perform below the Nation in SAT/ACT scores. Workers have few rights under State law.
Be careful what you wish for.
But your real question is does a union have the right to keep those not in the union from performing the "contracted" work?
In States that have right-to-work laws...No..they are not allowed to that unless the industry fall under the Railroad Labor Act
22 States mostly in the South and West are right-to-work States....28 States are not.
Those who favor right-to-work will point to the economic growth in these States as they attract companies seeking to pay workers less.
On the other hand would they enjoy this advantage if every State was non right-to-work State?
Take Texas for instance. High growth State....but among the highest uninsured rates, low end on per capita income, per capita wealth, few Elite Universities for it's size, students perform below the Nation in SAT/ACT scores. Workers have few rights under State law.
Be careful what you wish for.
Last edited: