• 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 in Virginia Target State’s Right to Work Law for Repeal

Renae

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Virginia Right to Work & Race -- Democrats Target State's Right to Work Law for Repeal | National Review
Bader points out a new wrinkle in the case the Democrats are making — that the law must be “racist” because it was passed at a time when segregationists were in control of the state. That claim is simply absurd, he points out: “But there is no reason to believe that the Virginia legislature had any racist motive for passing the right-to-work law. Northern states with no history of segregation passed the same right-to-work law Virginia did. Iowa and the Dakotas did so in the very same year, 1947.”
RTW laws protect the liberty of every worker who doesn’t want to support an incumbent union. Often, minority workers have been the victims of union aggression and they have as much right and reason to use the protection given by those laws as do all other workers. To declare that RTW is “racist” shows just how stupid the “progressives” think they have made the electorate with public schooling and constant propaganda.
Click to expand...
That's a platform: Vote for us, we'll force you to be in a union and pay for people who support us!


RTW should be the law of the land, union Thuggery needs to be stamped OUT.
 
Nickyjo said:
Where do you think working conditions are better, in states that have right to work or those that don’t?
Click to expand...

RTW States, because you aren't forced to join a group and pay them against your will. JUST to have a job.
 
I hope many states repeal right to work for less.
 
Nickyjo said:
Where do you think working conditions are better, in states that have right to work or those that don’t?
Click to expand...

Three years later, NERA has updated the report with additional data that reinforce its original findings. Specifically, the updated report presents the following information about the economic effects of right-to-work laws:

“Private sector employment grew by 27 percent in RTW states between 2001 and 2016, compared to 15 percent in non-RTW states.
“On average, the annual unemployment rate in RTW states was 0.4 percentage points lower than in non-RTW states. In concrete terms, if non-RTW states had had the same unemployment rate as RTW states in 2017, approximately 249,000 more people would have been employed.
“Output has also grown faster in RTW than in non-RTW states, rising by 38 percent between 2001 and 2016, compared to 29 percent in non-RTW states. Four of the top five states with the largest growth in real per capita output over this period are RTW states.
“The gap in manufacturing output is also substantial: Real manufacturing output rose by over 30 percent in RTW states between 2001 and 2016 compared with 21 percent in non-RTW states.
“Higher growth rates translated into higher personal incomes: Personal income in RTW states rose over ten percentage points more than in non-RTW states between 2001 and 2016, 39 percent versus 26 percent.
“Businesses tend to locate in RTW states, as evidenced by the more rapid growth of firms and establishments.
Click to expand...
Right-to-Work Laws: The Economic Evidence (2018 Update) | U.S. Chamber of Commerce
 
Helix said:
I hope many states repeal right to work for less.
Click to expand...

Right-to-Work Laws: The Economic Evidence (2018 Update) | U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Three years later, NERA has updated the report with additional data that reinforce its original findings. Specifically, the updated report presents the following information about the economic effects of right-to-work laws:

“Private sector employment grew by 27 percent in RTW states between 2001 and 2016, compared to 15 percent in non-RTW states.
“On average, the annual unemployment rate in RTW states was 0.4 percentage points lower than in non-RTW states. In concrete terms, if non-RTW states had had the same unemployment rate as RTW states in 2017, approximately 249,000 more people would have been employed.
“Output has also grown faster in RTW than in non-RTW states, rising by 38 percent between 2001 and 2016, compared to 29 percent in non-RTW states. Four of the top five states with the largest growth in real per capita output over this period are RTW states.
“The gap in manufacturing output is also substantial: Real manufacturing output rose by over 30 percent in RTW states between 2001 and 2016 compared with 21 percent in non-RTW states.
“Higher growth rates translated into higher personal incomes: Personal income in RTW states rose over ten percentage points more than in non-RTW states between 2001 and 2016, 39 percent versus 26 percent.
“Businesses tend to locate in RTW states, as evidenced by the more rapid growth of firms and establishments.
“As of 2017, about four percent of private sector workers in RTW states belonged to unions, compared with about nine percent in non-RTW states.”
Click to expand...


Pesky things, facts. They ruin your silly political nonsense.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
No one will be 'forced into a union'.
Huh. Staring off a thread w/a bald faced lie is never a good idea.
Click to expand...

LOL.

Closed Shop Agreements are Illegal in the United States
In a closed shop agreement, the employer agrees that he will only hire employees who are members of the union. If an employee ever leaves the union, the employer must fire the employee. Closed shop agreements are prohibited by national law (called the Taft-Hartley Act) in the United States.

Union Shop Agreements and Agency Shop Agreements Require Employees to Join Unions and/or Pay Dues to the Union
Union shop agreements allow an employer to hire non-union members but require the employee to join the union within a certain amount of time (usually after 30 days). In practice though, employers are not allowed to fire employees who refuse to join the union, provided the employees pay dues and fees to the union. Agency shop agreements require employees who do not join the union to pay dues and fees.

Right to Work Laws Prohibit Union and Agency Shop Agreements
Some states enacted so-called “right-to-work” laws. These laws prohibit both union shop and agency shop agreements. These laws prohibit a person from being required to join a union or to pay union dues and fees.
Click to expand...
What are closed shop, union shop, and agency shop agreements? | uslawessentials
 
Nickyjo said:
Where do you think working conditions are better, in states that have right to work or those that don’t?
Click to expand...

Unions have certainly made Detroit into a thriving and prosperous boom town. The working conditions are apt to be better working for profitable employers than those who are forced to close when competition takes their market share.
 
Helix said:
I work in a right to work for less state. It sucks.
Click to expand...


That's a You problem? Maybe you need to ya know, find a better job, seek a different employer? What's suck about it? That you make more money in a RTW state? Incomes have gone up more in such states. That you are having employment woes is on you.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Utterly and deliciously irrelevant. They can always vote with their feet and find a job elsewhere.

Fun to see you run from your lie in the OP.
Click to expand...

What are you on about? In RTW states you cannot be forced to pay union representation or dues, look at states that went RTW, what happened? union membership plummeted. Why? Because when people are given a choice, they tend to vote NO in large numbers.
 
Renae said:
That's a You problem? Maybe you need to ya know, find a better job, seek a different employer? What's suck about it? That you make more money in a RTW state? Incomes have gone up more in such states. That you are having employment woes is on you.
Click to expand...

LOL! And by posting that, you just undercut your dishonest assertion in the OP.

Thanks for proving my point for me. Didn't even have to lift a finger.
 
Renae said:
What are you on about? In RTW states you cannot be forced to pay union representation or dues, look at states that went RTW, what happened? union membership plummeted. Why? Because when people are given a choice, they tend to vote NO in large numbers.
Click to expand...

Wow. You're really intent on posting irrelevancies. It is a lie to assert that people will be forced to join a union. You simply cannot get out from under that simple reality.
 
Sorry all, deleting this as I was slow in understanding the games being played.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Wow. You're really intent on posting irrelevancies. It is a lie to assert that people will be forced to join a union. You simply cannot get out from under that simple reality.
Click to expand...
You're playing semantics... oh damn. I forgot, that's why I rarely read your posts, back to where you belong, have a nice day I have better things to do than play your word games. /wave
 
Renae said:
You're playing semantics... oh damn. I forgot, that's why I rarely read your posts, back to where you belong, have a nice day I have better things to do than play your word games. /wave
Click to expand...

No, I'm not. You're running from your own dishonesty.

Fun to watch you accuse others of what you yourself are guilty of. twump demographic #1.
 
Renae said:
What are you on about? In RTW states you cannot be forced to pay union representation or dues, look at states that went RTW, what happened? union membership plummeted. Why? Because when people are given a choice, they tend to vote NO in large numbers.
Click to expand...

Yet in those instances the union is still REQUIRED to represent you. Of course union membership dues plummeted. Why pay for something you get for free? Have a union represent you AND not pay fees. Of course people are going to do that if given a choice.

That's like saying if we make car insurance companies cover you and give you the option of not paying anything, do you think people are going to pay into their car insurance?
 
Renae said:
That's a You problem? Maybe you need to ya know, find a better job, seek a different employer? What's suck about it? That you make more money in a RTW state? Incomes have gone up more in such states. That you are having employment woes is on you.
Click to expand...

I work in advanced science and have two degrees. Everything has become fire at will contract work for lower pay. Raises barely keep up with inflation. We stay here because of family. Otherwise, I'd probably transfer to another state or country. Right to work for less is a scam.
 
Helix said:
I work in advanced science and have two degrees. Everything has become fire at will contract work for lower pay. Raises barely keep up with inflation. We stay here because of family. Otherwise, I'd probably transfer to another state or country. Right to work for less is a scam.
Click to expand...
Oh, that old canard. Yeah fire at will means that employers can make business adjustments and stay competitive because businesses do not exist for the employees. That's the problem you have, you don't understand why a business exists.
 
Praxas said:
Yet in those instances the union is still REQUIRED to represent you. Of course union membership dues plummeted. Why pay for something you get for free? Have a union represent you AND not pay fees. Of course people are going to do that if given a choice.

That's like saying if we make car insurance companies cover you and give you the option of not paying anything, do you think people are going to pay into their car insurance?
Click to expand...

Unions choose to cover all employees, they don't have too. THAT is the scam.

Why should I pay for a service I didn't want?
 
Renae said:
Oh, that old canard. Yeah fire at will means that employers can make business adjustments and stay competitive because businesses do not exist for the employees. That's the problem you have, you don't understand why a business exists.
Click to expand...

It means that I can be fired for any reason or for no reason at all with no recourse or representation. It's a rich Republican wet dream.
 
Renae said:
Unions choose to cover all employees, they don't have too. THAT is the scam.

Why should I pay for a service I didn't want?
Click to expand...

No it is not a choice for unions to cover all employees, it is a requirement. Why should a union have to cover someone that doesn't pay dues?
 
Helix said:
It means that I can be fired for any reason or for no reason at all with no recourse or representation. It's a rich Republican wet dream.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because you aren't the reason a business exists. I know that must crush your ego, that you aren't that important. Unions destroy businesses because they force employers to over pay for labor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom