View Poll Results: Do you favore the Employee Free Choice Act

Voters
35. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, I am completely in favor of the act

    2 5.71%
  • Yes, I am in favor, but with some reservations

    2 5.71%
  • No, I am opposed, but with some reservations

    3 8.57%
  • No, I am totally opposed

    25 71.43%
  • Don't know, Don't care.

    3 8.57%
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 74

Thread: Employee Free Choice Act

  1. #41
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,281

    Re: Employee Free Choice Act

    Originally Posted by justabubba
    some states do authorize an automatic check off. that requires the employees represented by the union to now be required to pay dues whether they agree to join the union or not

    That's plain wrong.
    it is something determined by each state. so, the citizen can move to change the state law, opt to avoid employment at union represented employer sites or move to a state which does not sanction check-off

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by justabubba
    other states do not compel union dues to be paid by anyone other than union members.
    That's fair.

    If I don't choose to be in someone quilting party, I shouldn't be required to supply the snacks.
    well, it helps the unions to win representational elections. where the employee knows that they will have dues automatically deducted, they tend to be less inclined to authorize a union when the election is held
    if the law is passed, they will be less inclined to sign the card requesting representation by the union

    in my own experience, being able to tell employees who were straddling the fence on this issue that they could both have the union representation and not pay dues (in our no check-off state) is what put us over the top when our election to be union represented was held

    so, it is a double edged sword


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by justabubba
    that allows "free riders" to be represented by the union - as the federal law requires the union represent all bargaining unit members.
    Good for federal law. Does that mean the goonion bosses would be able to spend more time and money schmoozing with Joe Biden at a Florida five start hotel on their dollars, if they could get them?
    not being familiar with your politics, have you been similarly opposed to lobbyists being able to schmooze politicians and fund their campaign war chests ... or do you take an unprincipaled stand and just oppose the unions doing that?

    It's not like the unions actually help the worker, cuz they don't.
    being a union official, who has just negotiated a $7.6 million award (for the federal employer's failure to pay compensable overtime), i must disagree with your position that unions do not assist their represented employees. i could simply provoke you, and thank you for paying your share of that multi-million dollar award as a U.S. taxpayer, but i will also point out that you are partially correct. unions are nothing other than the lawful assembly of employees of an organization, enforcing their legal rights as found in 5 USC chapter 71. where the employees choose not to participate in their own union's activities that leave a void for rogues and incompetents to occupy. this is not unlike being represented by rogue and incompetent politicians. and in both instances the representatives MUST be chosen by democratic election, under the law


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by justabubba
    those employees realize the rewards of union representation without having to incur the cost. only dues paying union members are able to vote in the union elections, however
    Only goonion members should bear the burden of their parasitic goonion leadership. What could be fairer than that?
    no doubt you think this is a good thing. but in reality, this facilitates those who want to (ab)use the union offices for wayward activities

  2. #42
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Employee Free Choice Act

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    it is something determined by each state. so, the citizen can move to change the state law, opt to avoid employment at union represented employer sites or move to a state which does not sanction check-off
    It's still plain wrong.

    It's just like saying that if 50%+1 of the state's population decides the other 50%-1 of the states population should pay twice the income tax, it's okay, because if was voted by the majority.

    Forced association is wrong, can you figure that out?

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    well, it helps the unions to win representational elections. where the employee knows that they will have dues automatically deducted, they tend to be less inclined to authorize a union when the election is held
    if the law is passed, they will be less inclined to sign the card requesting representation by the union

    in my own experience, being able to tell employees who were straddling the fence on this issue that they could both have the union representation and not pay dues (in our no check-off state) is what put us over the top when our election to be union represented was held
    More like, well, shoot, if what you fools want isn't going to cost me anything, I don't care what you do, jump off the bridge all you want.

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    not being familiar with your politics, have you been similarly opposed to lobbyists being able to schmooze politicians and fund their campaign war chests ... or do you take an unprincipaled stand and just oppose the unions doing that?
    Not the same issue. Nor have I stated any position on this issue you just non-sequitured into the discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    being a union official, who has just negotiated a $7.6 million award (for the federal employer's failure to pay compensable overtime), i must disagree with your position that unions do not assist their represented employees. i could simply provoke you, and thank you for paying your share of that multi-million dollar award as a U.S. taxpayer, but i will also point out that you are partially correct. unions are nothing other than the lawful assembly of employees of an organization, enforcing their legal rights as found in 5 USC chapter 71. where the employees choose not to participate in their own union's activities that leave a void for rogues and incompetents to occupy. this is not unlike being represented by rogue and incompetent politicians.
    No, it's like being represented by no one and having rogue and incompetent mobsters taking a hunk of your paycheck.

    You do realize what kind of people top the unions, don't you?

  3. #43
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,614

    Re: Employee Free Choice Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    In fact, many talk radio folks (and I know we don't all like talk radio) have been stating for months (or years) that bankruptcy would be the best way to get the monkeys off of the companys' backs.
    Just like bankruptcy is the only way out of California's financial troubles because like GM, the majority of California tax money goes to fund the union beasts.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! The Bitchspot Blog YouTube me! The Bitchspot Channel

  4. #44
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,614

    Re: Employee Free Choice Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    The problem with this logic is that the reason unions cost the companies more is that they are in fact getting more for their members. That is where the extra costs come from. The problem arises when the union demands, and the company gives them too much, and this is usually not seen until it's too late.

    I don't like unions as a general rule, and have voted against being unionized. However, I suspect that without the threat of unions and the fear of possible unionization, that things would get worse for workers in this country.
    But they're really not, that's the thing. Over the years, I've been on both sides of the union fence, I've been a member of a union and I've been management over a union shop and both sides suck. Management is hamstrung by union rules, the union would rather see a company go out of business than agree to any cuts and it adds a ridiculous layer of bureaucracy to the mix that union members have to deal with, you can't just go talk to management, you have to have a union representative with you to ask for a day off (and yes, I am serious, I had to do that on more than one occasion).

    The fact is, virtually every reason that unions got started over in the first place are now codified into law, we don't need unions to guarantee workplace safety, you've got OSHA and the state labor board for that. It's a concept that has long outlived it's usefulness, now it's just a bunch of thugs who are going around asking for protection money, most of the unions have absolutely no stake in the companies they are unionizing, they just want the money to keep rolling in.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! The Bitchspot Blog YouTube me! The Bitchspot Channel

  5. #45
    Matthew 16:3
    Tucker Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,365

    Re: Employee Free Choice Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Additional question:

    If 50%+1 "workers" in a shop vote to goonionize, does that mean the 50%-1 workers who declined will be forced to goonionize too?

    If they are, does this not violate the freedom of association guarantee of the First Amendment?
    I'm not sure about everywhere, but I refuse to join the union associated with my current occupation. I'm allowed to not be in the union.

    But I make the same as the rest of the unionized employees and get raises when they do, so this somehow entitles the union to take a "fee" that is lower than the normal union dues. I don't have a choice whether to pay them or not, but I would pay more money if I joined them and then have more deductions for various stuff I don't need or want.



    My occupation is somewhat odd though because anyone who does this particular job is actually paid by a third-party source (the third-party is actually charity) and not their actual employer.

    I'm just pointing out that, at least in Illinois, the option to not be a member of a union does exist for certain occupations.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  6. #46
    Hi
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    26,228

    Re: Employee Free Choice Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    I'm not sure about everywhere, but I refuse to join the union associated with my current occupation. I'm allowed to not be in the union.

    But I make the same as the rest of the unionized employees and get raises when they do, so this somehow entitles the union to take a "fee" that is lower than the normal union dues. I don't have a choice whether to pay them or not, but I would pay more money if I joined them and then have more deductions for various stuff I don't need or want.



    My occupation is somewhat odd though because anyone who does this particular job is actually paid by a third-party source (the third-party is actually charity) and not their actual employer.

    I'm just pointing out that, at least in Illinois, the option to not be a member of a union does exist for certain occupations.
    That is crazy, how can they rationalize taking money from you when they do nothing?

    The only occupation I know of in my state were you are required to join a union is when you work for one of the railroad operators.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  7. #47
    Matthew 16:3
    Tucker Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,365

    Re: Employee Free Choice Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    That is crazy, how can they rationalize taking money from you when they do nothing?
    It has something to do with raises and pay. Since I get paid according to their contract, they figure I owe them money.

    Doesn't really matter when you think about it. The real world union dues are the difference between what I pay and what a union member pays since nobody can get away without paying something.

    I look at that difference as the money I save by not being in the union.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  8. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Redneck Riviera
    Last Seen
    07-09-11 @ 04:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,728

    Re: Employee Free Choice Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    But they're really not, that's the thing. Over the years, I've been on both sides of the union fence, I've been a member of a union and I've been management over a union shop and both sides suck. Management is hamstrung by union rules, the union would rather see a company go out of business than agree to any cuts and it adds a ridiculous layer of bureaucracy to the mix that union members have to deal with, you can't just go talk to management, you have to have a union representative with you to ask for a day off (and yes, I am serious, I had to do that on more than one occasion).

    The fact is, virtually every reason that unions got started over in the first place are now codified into law, we don't need unions to guarantee workplace safety, you've got OSHA and the state labor board for that. It's a concept that has long outlived it's usefulness, now it's just a bunch of thugs who are going around asking for protection money, most of the unions have absolutely no stake in the companies they are unionizing, they just want the money to keep rolling in.
    Beyond that, there are rampant corruption and organized crime issues with some of the major unions.

    My dad was and is a union guy. He was a sheetmetal worker. The union trained him, and when he opened his own business, he hired union-trained workers. The union he belonged/belongs to is one of the few that still fulfills a mandate to employees of training and support. But it's rare these days.

  9. #49
    Advisor Birdzeye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    East Coast - mid Atlantic
    Last Seen
    01-26-14 @ 07:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    301

    Re: Employee Free Choice Act

    This bill worries me. I can see unwilling employees being intimidated or bullied into signing these cards. Without a subsequent election, they have no way to undo what they've been bullied into doing.

    I'm also offended by the whole closed shop idea, where employees can be forced to pay dues to a union that may or may not work in their interests.

    OTOH, I have worked for The Boss from Hell, for an employer who didn't give a rat's tail about treating employees well. I can understand why unions have come into existence. It's happened precisely because some employers treat their employees like s***, pay them a pittance, under horrible working conditions, abuse from supervisors, with sometimes outrageous productivity quotas, while the employer makes huge profits.

    Some employees who have tried to organize a union shop at their workplace have experienced harassment and even unjustified personnel action from their employers for trying to organize (EXAMPLE). I find this just as offensive as the strong-arm tactics of the unions.

    True free choice would involve freedom of employees from coercion, by either the unions or the company they work for.

  10. #50
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,281

    Re: Employee Free Choice Act

    Quote Originally Posted by Birdzeye View Post
    This bill worries me. I can see unwilling employees being intimidated or bullied into signing these cards. Without a subsequent election, they have no way to undo what they've been bullied into doing.

    I'm also offended by the whole closed shop idea, where employees can be forced to pay dues to a union that may or may not work in their interests.

    OTOH, I have worked for The Boss from Hell, for an employer who didn't give a rat's tail about treating employees well. I can understand why unions have come into existence. It's happened precisely because some employers treat their employees like s***, pay them a pittance, under horrible working conditions, abuse from supervisors, with sometimes outrageous productivity quotas, while the employer makes huge profits.

    Some employees who have tried to organize a union shop at their workplace have experienced harassment and even unjustified personnel action from their employers for trying to organize (EXAMPLE). I find this just as offensive as the strong-arm tactics of the unions.

    True free choice would involve freedom of employees from coercion, by either the unions or the company they work for.

    i agree with everything you stated

    this bill needs to be improved by making the department of labor ... not the union ... the recipient of any enrollment cards. the union nor the employer should have specific knowledge of what any employee indicated, just as neither party is allowed to know the specific employee ballots in a union election

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •