SC Just Stuck It To The Labor Unions

[Harpy Eagle]

Perhaps if the GOP wasn`t so anti worker...

Thanks to an 'Anti-worker' Republican / Republicans, workers are reaping the benefits of:

The best economy in decades
Lowest in-employment in decades
More jobs
More full-time jobs
Raises
Bonuses
Fewer people on food stamps / welfare
Higher home values
Not being forced to pay Union dues...


Democrats promise to:

Raise Taxes
Decrease the # of jobs
Eliminate raises
Eliminate bonuses
Higher unemployment
More people in Welfare / food stamps
Seizing more of their money for illegals
Etc...

Good to see you are still lying no matter how many times you get called out.

First quarter growth was only 2.2%. Stocks are way below their high. Labor force participation is very low. Wages are stagnant. Deficits are skyrocketing....

Forcast for 4.5% in Q2
Atlanta Fed: GDP growth forecast for Q2 eases to 4.7%

U.S.: real GDP growth by quarter 2011-2018 | Statista

Looking at this the growth is more consitant for Trump, Obama it went up and down wildly. Q2 is estimated at around 4.5%.......not bad at all

Quarter 1 was estimated at over 4...how did that come in?

 

[Anathema]

In some states, a private sector union can still require an employee to pay what is called "agency fees", meaning just the costs to represent them. You don't have to join the union, but you have to pay that fee. Not so anymore for public unions.

My question with this has been whether or not this will affect private Unions down the road or not. As I understand it this case only relates to PUBLIC SECTOR Unions. I wonder if people paying those agency fees in some Right to Work state will now try to get those cancelled as well.

 

[Nosmo King]

Good deal! If I read that right, this applies to government unions, correct? If so, they made the right decision.

Why should a non-union worker have to pay anything to a Union they aren't part of?

Because those non-union workers are enjoying the benefits union workers fought for.

When I was a college kid the steel mills around here were foing great guns. They offered college students summer jobs in the mills. The pay was fantastic, far more than a kid could earn at a Dairy Queen or a hardware store. That money helped out a lot. And I was grateful to kick in a portion of my pay to the USW so I could earn enough to pay for school.

I'm not sure if you can see this or not, but that argument is really weak.

Unions helped bring about a 40 hour work week decades ago. By your logic, everyone in America should pay the unions for that. The same for anything that helps other people.

We all should be paying dues to the phone switching company, the auto manufacturer; hell, the inventor of velcro or a thousand other things that help everyone.

Sorry, but it is un-American to require people to pay protection money. That's why it is against the law.

The 40 hour week is federal law. The wages and benefits in a union shop that are greater than those protected by federal law are in place due to union/company negotiations. So, at least in my situation, the unions negotiated the wage rate, the benefits package and the workplace conditions. You need to consider that.

 

[task0778]

Wow.

Supreme Court rules non-union workers cannot be forced to pay fees to public sector unions

Supreme Court rules in Janus labor union case

are they forced to pay dues to private sector ones?...

In some states, a private sector union can still require an employee to pay what is called "agency fees", meaning just the costs to represent them. You don't have to join the union, but you have to pay that fee. Not so anymore for public unions.

so they can get the union benefits and pay but dont have to join them.....seems hypocritical....

But should you be forced to pay dues for representation that you didn't ask for and don't want? It's not like the union didn't have a choice when they unilaterally decided to appoint themselves as an "exclusive rights bargaining" agent for all employees, wherein they themselves agree to represent all employees whether they are union members or not. Current federal law says they don't have to do that, they can choose just to represent only their own members during contract negotiations. [This is for non-public unions]

 

[Rustic]

No one should be forced into something they will not benefit from and do not want, right to work is the way to go. It’s all about choice...
Fuck progressive control freaks

Supreme Court deals big setback to labor unions

 

[NightFox]

Further, this decision doesn't abolish unions, merely eliminates their ability to extort funds from non members

And apparently only for public sector unions which, IMHO, should have never been allowed collective bargaining privileges in the first place.

"All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

 

[blastoff]

It seems like the right decision. Why should non-Union members be forced to pay. But again, 5-4? What are these Liberal judges doing???

Trying to protect the cash cow of union donations to dimocrat candidates.

 

[Rustic]

And here I thought republicans were all for unions these days, what with bragging about the tariffs and Trump parading them around.

It should be a choice dumbass. No one should be forced into something they will not benefit from and do not want

 

[Harry Dresden]

The far right of the GOP wants to put union members down on the plantation.

No, idiot. We want to give everyone the same opportunity to work wherever they want to, without being forced into a union.

And that's what the SC just did.

a question....will the non union people get the same pay and benefits as the union members,or will they have to take whatever the company wants to give them?...

Good question, I think the benefit of this ruling is the unions now have to work for support, before it was automatic and they could do what they wanted, now if people don't like their politics or other things, they can say no.

As for the contracts, I'm not sure. I'm not a fan of unions, because I think people can go where they want, I've never held a union job and have done just fine.

my beef with this Buck is in the PO were i worked it was Union, but you did not have to join or pay any kind of representative fees....and you get the same pay and benefits regardless and they had to represent you by law....many of these people were big bad mouthers of that union,yet they had no problems taking the pay and benefits that that union got them....thats being a hypocrite....now i had lots of beefs with my union in regards to their actions,but paid my dues because i knew that the PO would never even come close to giving its workers what we had,and this was proven every time the contract was up and what they offered....it just about always ended up in binding arbitration....if you dont want to join then take the benefits and keep your mouth shut,otherwise dont take the benefits or go someplace else and work....but thats me...

 

[Darkwind]

Good deal! If I read that right, this applies to government unions, correct? If so, they made the right decision.

Why should a non-union worker have to pay anything to a Union they aren't part of?

Because those non-union workers are enjoying the benefits union workers fought for.

When I was a college kid the steel mills around here were foing great guns. They offered college students summer jobs in the mills. The pay was fantastic, far more than a kid could earn at a Dairy Queen or a hardware store. That money helped out a lot. And I was grateful to kick in a portion of my pay to the USW so I could earn enough to pay for school.

I'm not sure if you can see this or not, but that argument is really weak.

Unions helped bring about a 40 hour work week decades ago. By your logic, everyone in America should pay the unions for that. The same for anything that helps other people.

We all should be paying dues to the phone switching company, the auto manufacturer; hell, the inventor of velcro or a thousand other things that help everyone.

Sorry, but it is un-American to require people to pay protection money. That's why it is against the law.

The 40 hour week is federal law. The wages and benefits in a union shop that are greater than those protected by federal law are in place due to union/company negotiations. So, at least in my situation, the unions negotiated the wage rate, the benefits package and the workplace conditions. You need to consider that.

I have. The bottom line is we do not charge people who benefit from the actions that were not taken in their behalf. You may say that the unions are working in their behalf, but the truth is, the unions are working for their own purposes.

To Me, the dues being forced on nonmembers was nothing more than figuratively sending hired muscle into the neighborhood businesses and demanding extortion money so they wouldn't break the store owners legs.

I did, however; think that the SCOTUS would rule in favor of the Unions. Looks like I didn't call that one right.

 

[Polishprince]

And apparently only for public sector unions which, IMHO, should have never been allowed collective bargaining privileges in the first place.

Collective bargaining for public employees only started about 1970 here in Pennsylvania under Milton Shapp. I remember the first teacher's strike about 1966 when I was in school.

Some states don't have collective bargaining yet for public employees.

 

[blastoff]

Wow.

Supreme Court rules non-union workers cannot be forced to pay fees to public sector unions

Supreme Court rules in Janus labor union case

/----/ Do you think there will be any retirements?
Retirement speculation shadows court’s final day

Trump needs to replace Kennedy and Ginsburg ASAP

Isn't Thomas thinking about retirement too? I don't think Ginsburg is going to quit while Trump is in office.

Probably not. But the Grim Reaper could intervene on our behalf as her health hasn’t been the greatest in recent years.

 

[Rustic]

Fuck the unions

 

[OldLady]

Good deal! If I read that right, this applies to government unions, correct? If so, they made the right decision.

Why should a non-union worker have to pay anything to a Union they aren't part of?

Because those non-union workers are enjoying the benefits union workers fought for.

When I was a college kid the steel mills around here were foing great guns. They offered college students summer jobs in the mills. The pay was fantastic, far more than a kid could earn at a Dairy Queen or a hardware store. That money helped out a lot. And I was grateful to kick in a portion of my pay to the USW so I could earn enough to pay for school.

I'm not sure if you can see this or not, but that argument is really weak.

Unions helped bring about a 40 hour work week decades ago. By your logic, everyone in America should pay the unions for that. The same for anything that helps other people.

We all should be paying dues to the phone switching company, the auto manufacturer; hell, the inventor of velcro or a thousand other things that help everyone.

Sorry, but it is un-American to require people to pay protection money. That's why it is against the law.

The 40 hour week is federal law. The wages and benefits in a union shop that are greater than those protected by federal law are in place due to union/company negotiations. So, at least in my situation, the unions negotiated the wage rate, the benefits package and the workplace conditions. You need to consider that.

That's the argument they used to take union "fees" from my check as a non member. I see the fairness in that. I was just making a low wage the first few years I was there, they were already taking a healthy chunk of my check for mandatory retirement benefits, and I was told by all my coworkers that the union did shit for us. The health insurance plans got worse every year and the salaries were one of the lowest in the country for social workers and if workers had a grievance in a particular office, the union was almost nonresponsive. So I didn't get involved until ... I think it was disability insurance they offered. Once I was making a bit more cash.

 

[NightFox]

And apparently only for public sector unions which, IMHO, should have never been allowed collective bargaining privileges in the first place.

Collective bargaining for public employees only started about 1970 here in Pennsylvania under Milton Shapp. I remember the first teacher's strike about 1966 when I was in school.

Some states don't have collective bargaining yet for public employees.

Yeah, sorry I was referring primarily to federal employees there, each individual state of course has the authority to decide the question for themselves but they would still face the same basic conflict of interest problem that FDR pointed out.

Personally I think the sooner that public sector unions have their collective bargaining and other state sanctioned privileges revoked the better.

 

[Harry Dresden]

The far right of the GOP wants to put union members down on the plantation.

No, idiot. We want to give everyone the same opportunity to work wherever they want to, without being forced into a union.

And that's what the SC just did.

a question....will the non union people get the same pay and benefits as the union members,or will they have to take whatever the company wants to give them?...

Why would a company drive the non union employee into the arms of the union?

ok so why would a company that is willing to pay union wages and benefits even have a union there?...why would its employees want to pay union dues if they knew that the place they work at takes care of them as good or better than a union?...

Because unions help the DNC.

i seriously doubt someone would want to pay a monthly stipend to a union that they dont need,just because it helps the DNC....many liberal democrats tell you what you want to hear but when you are not around will show how they really feel.....meaning "hey we need this union no matter what"....but when the ballots go around would vote against it....and then act shocked when the union gets defeated and tell everyone what a mistake you just made....but are smiling and singing a song on the way home....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Wow.

Supreme Court rules non-union workers cannot be forced to pay fees to public sector unions

Supreme Court rules in Janus labor union case

are they forced to pay dues to private sector ones?...

In some states, a private sector union can still require an employee to pay what is called "agency fees", meaning just the costs to represent them. You don't have to join the union, but you have to pay that fee. Not so anymore for public unions.

so they can get the union benefits and pay but dont have to join them.....seems hypocritical....

Sounds like Socialism

still hypocritical....

 

[Pilot1]

Public sector unions should be illegal. They are a huge conflict of interest as they use tax payer money to solely support DEMOCRAT candidates who turn around and give them sweetheart contracts. It is just another way the Dems money launder.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Breaking on FOX news right now. The US Supreme Court just ruled that non-union members can't be extorted by the unions. That's really going to hurt the Democrat's piggy bank.

Another day of WINNING!

We've got to get the money out of politics.....one small step

 

[Coyote]

Breaking on FOX news right now. The US Supreme Court just ruled that non-union members can't be extorted by the unions. That's really going to hurt the Democrat's piggy bank.

Another day of WINNING!

Sounds like you support the idea of oeople getting free stuff