Jump to content
270soft Forum

Right to Work


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, wolves said:

I don't know why you have to imply right to work as fascist then and have to use that as some kind of argument.

Then, I'll state it's authoritarian, which is what it is by context, correct?

I think it's a lose-lose situation either way for workers, as the law was passed with the manipulative intent that it would cause workers to leave the unions in droves, causing said unions to run out of funds and membership, and then leave said workers at the mercy of their employers and whatever peanuts they want to drop their salaries to and any employee benefits that are unilaterally cut-out of the worker's package to save the employers more money to go the same place all the money saved by big employers lately with tax cuts/havens, cutting corners and costs on products and services (to the detriment of said products and services), etc. are going lately - to drive up huge profit margins that are not reinvested into the company at all and, from a qualitive analysis of their change of business practices, many might say they don't really deserve...

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, pilight said:

So you have no objection to people claiming the advantages of unionization without paying for it.

I don't think people should claim benefits of union deals with companies if they're not part of said union.

Claiming general benefits like the minimum wage I think is more of a moralistic issue then a policy one.It depends if that person sees it as stealing or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

Update 2:

The jobs will be at a rate of $38 an hour which will total about $70,000 a year.

Question: How does that compare to similar jobs in states without "right-to-work," out of curiosity? And you didn't mention employer benefits outside of just raw pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Patine said:

Question: How does that compare to similar jobs in states without "right-to-work," out of curiosity? And you didn't mention employer benefits outside of just raw pay.

I am not sure to both questions.  Neither has been reported.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2017 at 11:08 PM, jvikings1 said:

Update: Braidy Industries, an aluminum company, has decided to place a facility in eastern Kentucky that will create 550 permanent jobs and will invest $1.3 billion in an area that really needs it.  Plus, 1,000 workers will be needed to build the facility.  This would not have happened if right to work was not passed.

Not sure if that was a driving cause of their decision. Ohio is gaining jobs quickly, but we haven't cut up unions. I see it as a violation of a citizen's right to assembly, and generally close to crony capitalism. It exacerbates the wage gap already growing in the US, and it stands to reason that right to work states have lower average wage $1,558 lower per year total. http://www.epi.org/publication/right-to-work-states-have-lower-wages/

Workplace fatalities are 34% higher http://irlee.umich.edu/Publications/Docs/RightToWorkLawsAndFatalitiesInConstruction.pdf

Small businesses are not typically unionized, so RTW laws give larger corperations another advantage over them, without changing Small business expenses.

Right to work makes solid sense in theory, like abstinence only sex ed. unfortunately, like Abstinence only, it ends up doing much the opposite of it's intent. It allows workers to get a union contract without paying union dues, and weakens unions' abilities to fight court battles, negotiate contracts etc. with large businesses. It makes sense, but when rubber hits road, it doesn't quite work out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LokiLoki22 said:

Not sure if that was a driving cause of their decision. Ohio is gaining jobs quickly, but we haven't cut up unions. I see it as a violation of a citizen's right to assembly, and generally close to crony capitalism. It exacerbates the wage gap already growing in the US, and it stands to reason that right to work states have lower average wage $1,558 lower per year total. http://www.epi.org/publication/right-to-work-states-have-lower-wages/

Workplace fatalities are 34% higher http://irlee.umich.edu/Publications/Docs/RightToWorkLawsAndFatalitiesInConstruction.pdf

Small businesses are not typically unionized, so RTW laws give larger corperations another advantage over them, without changing Small business expenses.

Right to work makes solid sense in theory, like abstinence only sex ed. unfortunately, like Abstinence only, it ends up doing much the opposite of it's intent. It allows workers to get a union contract without paying union dues, and weakens unions' abilities to fight court battles, negotiate contracts etc. with large businesses. It makes sense, but when rubber hits road, it doesn't quite work out.

The company specifically stated that Kentucky wouldn't have been considered if it wasn't right to work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

The company specifically stated that Kentucky wouldn't have been considered if it wasn't right to work.

I guess NY will not be considered.:(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...