• 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!

Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmembers to

Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

That seems doubtful. If the court wasn't willing to rule so broadly in this case what makes you think they are laying the brickwork to do so five years from now?

The reasoning is in place and the precedent has been set. The freedom of association is abridged by this practice, essentially forcing people into unwanted associations. The constitutional error in this practice has been pointed out and anyone that wants to oppose it now has the silver bullet.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

What does forced Union dues have to do with " Public Services "?

They are both being starved of funds by the Republicans so they can become nonfunctional.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

On the contrary, I sure do.

If you think this directly effects actual government employees, you don't.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

Yayy! Now they get all the benefits and representation that union offers for their employment but they dont have to pay the dues!

I agree with the idea that an employee shouldn't be required to join a union and/or pay fees, but... I also feel that if a person chooses to not join then they shouldn't get any of the benefits, either. They should negotiate their own individual contract and cover their own rear end if something happens.

My opinion, may or may not be in line with the ruling.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

If you think this directly effects actual government employees, you don't.

Starving funds that are used by unions to represent workers won't effect them? It simply means those that are not freeloader will have to pay more because costs will not go down.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

Starving funds that are used by unions to represent workers won't effect them? It simply means those that are not freeloader will have to pay more because costs will not go down.

It's more like the union freeloading off of Pam Harris,

Mobile Site Preview
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

It's more like the union freeloading off of Pam Harris,

Mobile Site Preview

Leave it to the Cato Institute. The real motive behind the whole fight is for business groups/think tanks to strip unions of money so they can't push their candidates into office like they (business groups) can since the United Citizen case. The only way these workers are going to make somewhat of a decent wage is through collective bargaining and part of the unions job is to advocate for a politicians who will allow collective bargaining rights to exist in the state. Otherwise, business groups will push in politicians that strip these rights from these workers and they essentially have no voice at all. As far as Republicans are concerned, they will leave them making bottom of the barrel wages because they don't give a rats arse.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

That is exactly what will happen. Just another way Republicans can try to not only defund and starve our public services but now also starve unions of any funds. Nothing like a good old fashion oligarchy.

Better to let unions fleece workers that want nothing to do with union jack thugs stealing thier money right?
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

Yayy! Now they get all the benefits and representation that union offers for their employment but they dont have to pay the dues!

Do they? They forego strike pay and will receive no union advocacy if they have a dispute with their employer. And it is strictly their choice whether they want such benefits or advocacy or not. SCOTUS has been doing a much better job protecting the unalienable rights of the people to be who and what they are and determine their own destiny instead of government dictating what that will be.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

Better to let unions fleece workers that want nothing to do with union jack thugs stealing thier money right?

Without dues to collectively bargain, these workers will get paid rock bottom wages. The union isn't fleecing anyone because they are all benefiting from higher wages through collective bargaining.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

Leave it to the Cato Institute. The real motive behind the whole fight is for business groups/think tanks to strip unions of money so they can't push their candidates into office like they (business groups) can since the United Citizen case. The only way these workers are going to make somewhat of a decent wage is through collective bargaining and part of the unions job is to advocate for a politicians who will allow collective bargaining rights to exist in the state. Otherwise, business groups will push in politicians that strip these rights from these workers and they essentially have no voice at all. As far as Republicans are concerned, they will leave them making bottom of the barrel wages because they don't give a rats arse.

So, you're ok with unions shaking down private citizens? You ready for welfare recipients to start paying union dues?
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

So, you're ok with unions shaking down private citizens? You ready for welfare recipients to start paying union dues?

Private citizens are not being shaken down:roll:
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

Without dues to collectively bargain, these workers will get paid rock bottom wages. The union isn't fleecing anyone because they are all benefiting from higher wages through collective bargaining.

Unions, especially public sector should be outlawed. They do far more harm them good, and destroy business and government not for the workers but for the union leaders bank accounts.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

Unions, especially public sector should be outlawed. They do far more harm them good, and destroy business and government not for the workers but for the union leaders bank accounts.

That's a bunch of horse manure. Those workers will only see any kind of pay increase with collective bargaining rights, otherwise they'd get jack squat.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

That's a bunch of horse manure. Those workers will only see any kind of pay increase with collective bargaining rights, otherwise they'd get jack squat.
you have no idea what you are talking about.

many of these people are taking care of family members or even friends. these people are lossing money out of their SS and or welfare checks to pay union dues. most of these people dont' see any wages from this but are forced to join the union to provide care for their own family.

so yea the union was shaking down private citizens and taking money from people that needed it the most.

So if you went to take care of your eldery mother because she needed it you would be forced to join the union pay union dues from her check and receive nothing in return.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

you have no idea what you are talking about.

many of these people are taking care of family members or even friends. these people are lossing money out of their SS and or welfare checks to pay union dues. most of these people dont' see any wages from this but are forced to join the union to provide care for their own family.

so yea the union was shaking down private citizens and taking money from people that needed it the most.

So if you went to take care of your eldery mother because she needed it you would be forced to join the union pay union dues from her check and receive nothing in return.

These people are getting paid with the same money any state home healthcare worker receives.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

That's a bunch of horse manure. Those workers will only see any kind of pay increase with collective bargaining rights, otherwise they'd get jack squat.

In the case of California, after the legislators cashed the unions checks given to buy legislation changing the workers to state employees, the in home workers compensation did go up. On the other hand, their ranks exploded to over 264,000 today, netting the SEIU over $60 million annually from the investment in the liberal/progressive legislators they bought.

Further on the down side, the fraud has been ignored, and it's the working taxpayers (a shrinking percentage in Progressive California) who are footing the bill. Just can't see how all that is a plus.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

As long as the union isnt forced to represent them, then I have no problem with them not paying dues. Of course what I have a problem with or not has no relation to laws, LOL.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

That's a bunch of horse manure. Those workers will only see any kind of pay increase with collective bargaining rights, otherwise they'd get jack squat.
No, they'll out price thier jobs and break states ability to pay "retirement". Unions are parasites.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

These people are getting paid with the same money any state home healthcare worker receives.
So drunk on union lies are you. Michigan did this to, freed the home healthcare folks from union chicanery.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

Private citizens are not being shaken down:roll:

Pam Harris was being shaken down. She isn't a government employee, nor a member of the union. What claim does the union have to her son's social security. The union, via executive order signed by the governer of Illinois were literally stealing from a handicapped person. What kind of dirbag does it take to do something like that?
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

In the case of California, after the legislators cashed the unions checks given to buy legislation changing the workers to state employees, the in home workers compensation did go up. On the other hand, their ranks exploded to over 264,000 today, netting the SEIU over $60 million annually from the investment in the liberal/progressive legislators they bought.

Further on the down side, the fraud has been ignored, and it's the working taxpayers (a shrinking percentage in Progressive California) who are footing the bill. Just can't see how all that is a plus.

Well that really is the contention. The GOP is seething mad that the union can campaign for legislators that will allow collective bargaining in the state. It's pretty transparent because like I already said they don't give a damn if those healthcare workers get paid the lowest possible denominator.
 
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

No, they'll out price thier jobs and break states ability to pay "retirement". Unions are parasites.

Out price their jobs:roll: do you even realize what these people make. I promise you they are not remotely over priced.
 
Last edited:
Re: Supreme Court says public sector union of home care workers can't force nonmember

Well that really is the contention. The GOP is seething mad that the union can campaign for legislators that will allow collective bargaining in the state. It's pretty transparent because like I already said they don't give a damn if those healthcare workers get paid the lowest possible denominator.

Actually, it's been shown the public sector unions, well in the case of California, the SEIU, don't really care about the patients involved, they are just a necessary evil. The bottom line is dues, and in California, that means over $60 million annually from IHSS workers alone.

Hopefully this ruling bankrupts the union and it's corruption, and returns the taxpayers investment in taking care of the elderly to loving support, rather than farming dying people for dollars.
 
Back
Top Bottom