• 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!

Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

you mean 'right to work for less money, less benefits, and less workplace safety'? yeah, thats a hell of a way to compete.

And probably less laundered money for the democrats. That's the real rub here for the union leadership.
 
Sounds like an awfully vague way of line itemizing it...Plenty of room for corruption, and theft.

Are you suggesting coruption in unions. I'm shocked at the thought!
 
God forbid someone be allowed to work without being forced to pay a union they don't want to join.

Freedom in the eyes of the Democrat party.

And just think they love pointing out peoples right to association. I guess it only applies if all your co-workers agree with your choice. :D
 
Not really. The dues are to assure the non union worker is also represented.

They don't want representation by the union. That is the entire point of them not joining and not paying the dues. Is that not obvious?
 
"My machine is down, and I have nothing to do. I'll go sit in the cafeteria until it's fixed. And I'm not sweeping that damned floor!! It's not my job classification!! Call my union rep!!!" Who's the freeloader?

In my career as a machinist I was fortunate to work in two union shops. In both of these shops, the management could, and did make workers sweep the shop. We had labor grades to decide the pay rate, from 4 to 12. As long as the company paid your wages, they could require you to do anything at your pay grade or below. Sweeping and cleaning the machines was a common practice.
 
F.D.R. Warned Us About Public Sector Unions - Room for Debate - NYTimes.com

It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government.

That wasn’t Newt Gingrich, or Ron Paul, or Ronald Reagan talking. That was George Meany -- the former president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O -- in 1955. Government unions are unremarkable today, but the labor movement once thought the idea absurd.

The founders of the labor movement viewed unions as a vehicle to get workers more of the profits they help create. Government workers, however, don’t generate profits. They merely negotiate for more tax money. When government unions strike, they strike against taxpayers. F.D.R. considered this “unthinkable and intolerable.
 
I find that disgusting. We live in a democratic nation. If "the majority" wants the state to be Right to Work, then that's what ought to happen. That asshole should be ashamed of himself.
Except the majority opposes right to work... And when the government explicitly acts against the will of the people and includes legislative tricks to prevent a referendum, there's nothing wrong with a little revolution.
 
Honestly now. It's a metaphor. There won't be a brawl on the house floor.

Funny, the left had a problem with Palin's comment about a 'target'. I don't recall them suggesting a metaphor. I could be wrong.
 
Funny, the left had a problem with Palin's comment about a 'target'. I don't recall them suggesting a metaphor. I could be wrong.

Two things:
1.) The DNC is not the left.
2.) Palin's comments incited violence, but these were rather tame. Many people use fight rhetoric before debates(I tend to as well), it's not that uncommon/
 
Snyder, who previously had said repeatedly that right-to-work was "not on my agenda," says he will sign the measures.

FAIL! You had previously claimed:

…Note, the Gov last year stated he would not sign off on a "RTW" law.

Continuance of this is a waste of time but if you wish...knock yourself out!
 
It's nice seeing Michigan making good strides towards recovery. I wonder if the same people that called out Palin for having a target board will also call out this moron for literally saying that there will be violence.
 
trying to be nice here, but you and maggie need to do some homework...all these 'bennies' didnt just come from the 'good hearts' of these businesses....40hr week, time and a half for overtime, vacation days, sick days, child labor laws...you can thank unions for them.

Agreed, but those bennies are now establishment and have been for half a century. What is the present purpose of the unions, now that they have achieved all these good things? What benefits have unions actually brought about in the last 50 years?
 
....
What benefits have unions actually brought about in the last 50 years?.....

1993: The family and Medical Leave Act.

It “requires state agencies and private employers with more than 50 employees to provide up to 12 weeks of job-protected unpaid leave annually for workers to care for a newborn, newly adopted child, seriously ill family member or for the worker’s own illness.”
 
1993: The family and Medical Leave Act.

It “requires state agencies and private employers with more than 50 employees to provide up to 12 weeks of job-protected unpaid leave annually for workers to care for a newborn, newly adopted child, seriously ill family member or for the worker’s own illness.”

Could you show the link to unions, I am not seeing it.
 
better check that, this would not have happened in january....the repubs lost seats in the house, and several repubs would have voted with the dems in the house....this would have gone nowhere.

Sounds like sour grapes to me.
Don't like it, vote in people to overturn it.

These representatives still have the authority to draft and implement laws.
 
Could you show the link to unions, I am not seeing it.

From this link:
FMLA is a federal law sponsored by labor Unions.

It protects certain workers from discipline when using time away from work to care for their own serious medical condition, or that of an immediate family member. FMLA is associated with EAP, the difference being that FMLA is a law protecting Members and EAP is a program for assisting Members who are experiencing difficult times. An EAP coordinator can assist you with applying for FMLA.

read more:

IAM District 141 F.M.L.A. Family Medical Leave Act
 
Title directly copy and pasted

Look at the link in my post. It says "Democrats"

Checked again direct copy/paste:



Fail

No.

The Article, as in the words in the story, directly say one Democrat.

The titles, both the thread's and the article's, both say democrats.


Once again, you fail. But frankly, that's nothing new from you.
 

Yeah, to cede the 'Leave' expense from the Unions to the employer...

FMLA became effective on August 5, 1993, for most employers. If a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) was in effect on that date, FMLA became effective on the expiration date of the CBA or February 5, 1994, whichever was earlier. FMLA entitles eligible employees to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave in a 12-month period for specified family and medical reasons

The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993
 
In my career as a machinist I was fortunate to work in two union shops. In both of these shops, the management could, and did make workers sweep the shop. We had labor grades to decide the pay rate, from 4 to 12. As long as the company paid your wages, they could require you to do anything at your pay grade or below. Sweeping and cleaning the machines was a common practice.

Now there's a union I could support. ;)
 
Blood there will be. The last time people were squeezed in the Motor City was in 1967. That was the year of the Detroit riots.
Freedom comes to Michigan? Who would have thought it? Do you believe the majority of the people support having to join a union and pay dues just so they can work?

If blood flows let us hope it will be the blood of union thugs and toadies.
 
Except the majority opposes right to work... And when the government explicitly acts against the will of the people and includes legislative tricks to prevent a referendum, there's nothing wrong with a little revolution.

Prove the majority opposes right to work. (I hate to say "prove it," but I do think you're wrong.) The majority of union members no doubt opposes right to work. The rest of us? I actually doubt it.
 
I find that disgusting. We live in a democratic nation. If "the majority" wants the state to be Right to Work, then that's what ought to happen. That asshole should be ashamed of himself.

People who act like thugs and assholes, have no shame.
 
Back
Top Bottom