# Right to work



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

I think RTW hurts the unions abilities 
to legally command control of a construction 
work sight by demanding all trades involved
on the project be union companies.

Pretty sure right to work does not allow 
this anymore. It does not mean that the 
GC must intermingle non union w/ union
it just means GC's can if they want to.

That's huge because back in the day a
job was normally all union.


----------



## kg7879 (Feb 3, 2014)

It basically means you do not have to be a member if you do not want to be. Technically a non union electrician could come sign book 3 and take a call and not be a union member. They would still be required to pay some type of due for the referral I believe but they wouldn't have to pay dues continually.

I know our local dispatch will make it very hard for this person to take a call by not being helpful at all.


----------



## matt1124 (Aug 23, 2011)

Oklahoma is right to work. I don't know how all that union/non-union stuff works here. I do know that anti-union"ism" was taught to me somewhere along the lines.

Sometimes I wonder if it would be better, if we all joined forces and used our strong power to stop this race to the bottom job cost (and wages) and especially made it real hard for the unlicensed to do their thing here by strong-arming supplies out of their hands.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

kg7879 said:


> It basically means you do not have to be a member if you do not want to be. Technically a non union electrician could come sign book 3 and take a call and not be a union member. They would still be required to pay some type of due for the referral I believe but they wouldn't have to pay dues continually.
> 
> I know our local dispatch will make it very hard for this person to take a call by not being helpful at all.


are you saying a non union person can walk 
into a local and sign in the book? that's
news to me.


----------



## active1 (Dec 29, 2009)

lighterup said:


> are you saying a non union person can walk
> into a local and sign in the book? that's
> news to me.


Yep. Maybe a few times a year when we have big shows some of the calls go unfilled. In that case book 3, non-union people get a chance. Herd of some sending their wife in, just to get 4 or more hours of JW pay. But have not seen it. In the contract (at lest ours) it states the book 3 will be replaced with IBEW members as soon as available. Don't remember if it's written, but they would be the 1st to be let go.

What's different about the IBEW is they dispatch the work.
Right to work is more about the jobs that people apply for and get hired.
Such as government jobs. School teachers, police, fire fighters.
NV is a RTW sate. A large example is the hotel workers.
Many of the service fall under the culinary union 223.
The hotel hires and trains the person.
They have the option of joining 223.
But by not joining they may be illegally discriminated by their immediate supervisor and coworker.

Sometimes it's not a matter of not wanting to spend money on the union of being anti-union. More that the union is so misaligned with your political beliefs. Such as 223 supporting illegal immigration and workers.


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

Government, or "public sector" workers should be forbidden to organize. They'd be better off. Look at Congress for example, $187,000/yr. ain't from "collective bargaining". At the same time, that salary isn't enough to amount to multimillionaire status either. How does _that_ happen?


----------



## Wirenuting (Sep 12, 2010)

joebanana said:


> Government, or "public sector" workers should be forbidden to organize. They'd be better off. Look at Congress for example, $187,000/yr. ain't from "collective bargaining". At the same time, that salary isn't enough to amount to multimillionaire status either. How does _that_ happen?


But the tradesmen don’t get anything like that. 
Joining a union is optional and even then the non-payers get representation. 
The federal workers would be screwed even harder without the unions. 
We just recently went to the Metal Trades council here locally. 
We can’t strike, force wages or anything, but it’s better then nothing and getting screwed by those $185,000 folks.


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

Wirenuting said:


> But the tradesmen don’t get anything like that.
> Joining a union is optional and even then the non-payers get representation.
> The federal workers would be screwed even harder without the unions.
> We just recently went to the Metal Trades council here locally.
> We can’t strike, force wages or anything, but it’s better then nothing and getting screwed by those $185,000 folks.


The difference between Congress and the trades is, the trades have to bargain for raises, Congress gets to vote for theirs. Who wouldn't vote for a pay-raise? Even if you're already getting $187,000/yr. + chauffeur, limo, government credit card, paid office space, and staff, + + +........
That's why (at least part of) we're so far in debt. :vs_mad:


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

For the workman with tools in his hands, what "right to work" really boils down to is that you can be fired at any time, for any reason, or for no reason at all. The whole name- right to work- sounds empowering, but it's anything but. I'm a supporter of right to work, but I'm also a realist. :wink:


----------



## Sblk55 (Sep 8, 2017)

RTW does not affect the Union halls as much as it dose Union shops. By Union shop I mean a plant or factory, or as some have said public employees who are hired by management, but as a requirement of said employment must join the union having jurisdiction.

Right to work states that you do not have to join or pay anything but that the union must give you all the same protections it does its members. Including negotiating wages, working conditions, hours, etc. etc. . It also means that even to the expense of arbitration to defend your job against unmerited dismissal. 

I have no problem with people not wanting to join the union, but them the union and its members should not have to spend their money protecting them.

Steve


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

I can't wait till right to eat comes out...ya
know cheeseburgers whether ya pay for em or not


----------



## drsparky (Nov 13, 2008)

One of the big drivers of RTW is folks disagreeing with the union spending their dues for political purposes they disagree with. 
If the union bosses stuck to things that directly involve the trade there would not be as much resentment on paying dues. 
Automatically giving the Democratic Party candidate donations causes the other party to not support whatever the union is interested in.
I've seen democrat candidates basically ignore union issues after they are elected because they know whatever happens they will still get union donations for the next election just because they are a democrat regardless of their voting record.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

drsparky said:


> One of the big drivers of RTW is folks disagreeing with the union spending their dues for political purposes they disagree with.
> If the union bosses stuck to things that directly involve the trade there would not be as much resentment on paying dues.
> Automatically giving the Democratic Party candidate donations causes the other party to not support whatever the union is interested in.
> I've seen democrat candidates basically ignore union issues after they are elected because they know whatever happens they will still get union donations for the next election just because they are a Democrat regardless of their voting record.


I have said this for years, want more Republicans to support unions send them some cash, what have the unions got to lose the Democrats ignore unions all the time knowing they have a check coming before the election.

Public sector unions should be abolished.


----------



## Wirenuting (Sep 12, 2010)

joebanana said:


> The difference between Congress and the trades is, the trades have to bargain for raises, Congress gets to vote for theirs. Who wouldn't vote for a pay-raise? Even if you're already getting $187,000/yr. + chauffeur, limo, government credit card, paid office space, and staff, + + +........
> That's why (at least part of) we're so far in debt. :vs_mad:


And the federal tradesmen get no chance to bargain. 
We only get what's authorized under law.. Some years we get zero.
But even then we still pay higher premiums for insurance and taxes. 
The unions can do nothing about that..

The general public believes every fed makes an average of $85k ..
Wish that was me.


----------



## kg7879 (Feb 3, 2014)

lighterup said:


> are you saying a non union person can walk
> into a local and sign in the book? that's
> news to me.


They can sign book 3 in a RTW. I do not know of one dispatcher that would help them. As soon as they stated their position that conversation would go down hill fast.


----------



## Lone Crapshooter (Nov 8, 2008)

To start with do not believe your union or the AFL/CIO they are not going to tell you the whole truth about right to work.

To get the whole truth read what the courts and the Department of Labor have said about the right to work.
The main issue with right to work is nonunion members having to be represented by the union. This happens when the union has sole bargaining rights. If the union forfeits it's sole bargaining then you can have 2 classes of the same workers one union and the other non union. The labor law spells this out. 

In a agency shop where the union has sole bargaining rights the nonunion workers have to pay a agency fee to the union if they benefit by the actions of the union. 

Right to work actually empowers the union members because it give the members the right it stand up and say listen to us or we are going to cut your money off. 
One thing to remember . The day you think that the AFL/CIO is anything more than a fund raising arm of the Democratic you are living in a fantecity world.

LC


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

It's gonna be all robots inside twenty years anyway. They don't require payment, just purchase price to get them from the Bill Gates Foundation. And then also the batteries from the ElonMusk Charitable Foundation as well.... What we'll have is a right to work 24 hours a day, seven days a week nonstop and no lunch breaks..........


----------



## kg7879 (Feb 3, 2014)

drsparky said:


> One of the big drivers of RTW is folks disagreeing with the union spending their dues for political purposes they disagree with.
> If the union bosses stuck to things that directly involve the trade there would not be as much resentment on paying dues.
> Automatically giving the Democratic Party candidate donations causes the other party to not support whatever the union is interested in.
> I've seen democrat candidates basically ignore union issues after they are elected because they know whatever happens they will still get union donations for the next election just because they are a democrat regardless of their voting record.


Every local has to discuss disbursements or receipts in the monthly meeting. Every union has a good of the union section in the meeting. You have the right to or not to donate to COPE.

So, in reality, you three chances to support or not support the way the local is being run by speaking up during meetings. While I agree democrats take union support for granted I do not see many Republicans winning elections by supporting unions.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

joebanana said:


> Government, or "public sector" workers should be forbidden to organize. They'd be better off. Look at Congress for example, $187,000/yr. ain't from "collective bargaining". At the same time, that salary isn't enough to amount to multimillionaire status either. How does _that_ happen?


Do state / county / municipal governments enter into contracts with AFSCME or other unions? 

If so I don't like the idea of the government entering into such an agreement that would restrict public jobs to members of certain organizations. If a private company wants to enter into such an agreement with a union, that's fine, it's between the two of them. But the public jobs should not be restricted to people that satisfy some private entity (such as a union) requirements for membership.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

drsparky said:


> One of the big drivers of RTW is folks disagreeing with the union spending their dues for political purposes they disagree with.
> If the union bosses stuck to things that directly involve the trade there would not be as much resentment on paying dues.
> Automatically giving the Democratic Party candidate donations causes the other party to not support whatever the union is interested in.
> I've seen democrat candidates basically ignore union issues after they are elected because they know whatever happens they will still get union donations for the next election just because they are a democrat regardless of their voting record.


It's very ironic to me. 

Once a company signs the union contract, they're married - it's very hard to get out of it if the union doesn't deliver the way they promised. 

Likewise, the union acts like they married the Democratic party and now they're stuck with them, the Democratic party does jack for unions any more. 

But they aren't married. The union is free to support whatever candidates actually vote their way on the issues they care about. 

If the unions started giving the Republican party or third parties some play, see how fast Republican / third party candidates start paying attention to what unions want. And, see how fast the Democratic party shapes up. 

Unions have to learn you don't dangle that carrot on the stick, the donkey don't have to move.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> For the workman with tools in his hands, what "right to work" really boils down to is that you can be fired at any time, for any reason, or for no reason at all. The whole name- right to work- sounds empowering, but it's anything but. I'm a supporter of right to work, but I'm also a realist. :wink:



*He's Alive!!* :vs_rocking_banana::clap::vs_sob:


----------



## Pete E (Jan 2, 2018)

drsparky said:


> One of the big drivers of RTW is folks disagreeing with the union spending their dues for political purposes they disagree with.


In the UK one of the changes that was made a few years back is that a Union member can elect not to have any of their Union dues being donated to a political party.

As 99.99% of Unions here are aligned to the Labour Part, these was seen by many as a Conservative (they were in Government) attack on the funding of the Labour Party.

Personally I agree with the law, although I am not too sure how effective it is in reality as I am sure there are many ways around it.


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

splatz said:


> Do state / county / municipal governments enter into contracts with AFSCME or other unions?
> 
> If so I don't like the idea of the government entering into such an agreement that would restrict public jobs to members of certain organizations. If a private company wants to enter into such an agreement with a union, that's fine, it's between the two of them. But the public jobs should not be restricted to people that satisfy some private entity (such as a union) requirements for membership.


"Governments"?, or government employee's? Governments are _like_ corporations, once you're in, there's no way to remove you. No matter how egregious your actions.
Government employees, on the other hand, are "public SERVANTS", and should be paid minimum wage, that includes Congress. Servants should never be paid more than those they serve. How can Congress set wages for the private sector, while they make an outrages salary, with ridiculous benefits? Paid for by the private sector. 
If minimum wage doesn't cut it, they can get a REAL job.
Take for example, DMV employee's, are these idiots really worth more than the minimum wage? Do they deserve more? 
~End of Rant~


----------



## TGGT (Oct 28, 2012)

In summary Right to Work means unions have to equally and fairly represent non-members for free if the majority of the employees are represented. Republicans like to leave that detail out. 

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## TGGT (Oct 28, 2012)

splatz said:


> It's very ironic to me.
> 
> Once a company signs the union contract, they're married - it's very hard to get out of it if the union doesn't deliver the way they promised.
> 
> ...


I think part of the problem is candidates running on ideological purity these days. I used to be against pork barrel spending, but now I wonder if it's only help make partisanship worse.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## drsparky (Nov 13, 2008)

kg7879 said:


> Every local has to discuss disbursements or receipts in the monthly meeting. Every union has a good of the union section in the meeting. You have the right to or not to donate to COPE.
> 
> So, in reality, you three chances to support or not support the way the local is being run by speaking up during meetings. While I agree democrats take union support for granted I do not see many Republicans winning elections by supporting unions.


I made the mistake of asking why we were giving a donation to the guy running for reelection for sheriff, the answer "he is a democrat and we support all democrats". I was about run out of the hall and called "that damn republican" for even questioning the offices judgment. (I'm a registered independent)
Years later I swapped my ticket to Maine and my old BA called my new hall to tell them I was a fine electrician but to watch out because I was a trouble making damn republican. You learn to shut up and vote the line.


----------



## Pete E (Jan 2, 2018)

drsparky said:


> You learn to shut up and vote the line.


Sorry, but I don't tow anybody elses line..In life you have to live by your convictions/principles and be true to yourself....

In work three of my colleagues are vegetarian, one a vegan very much into animals rights...I am a hunter and a meat eater to the core and I wasn't slow making that known although I was as popular as a fart in a spacesuit at times...


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Pete E said:


> Sorry, but I don't tow anybody elses line..In life you have to live by your convictions/principles and be true to yourself....
> 
> In work three of my colleagues are vegetarian, one a vegan very much into animals rights...I am a hunter and a meat eater to the core and I wasn't slow making that known although I was as popular as a fart in a spacesuit at times...


If you are a hunter, you don't go to work for PETA. 

There may be repercussions from bringing your politics into the workplace. I've been able to keep my mouth shut for 20 years. 

"Being true to yourself" is just silly bravado. In general the right wants to destroy unions, so it's understandable that unions don't support the right. It's the same way as you wouldn't expect an abortion doctor's office to want to hear that their employee votes for Republican.


----------



## Pete E (Jan 2, 2018)

HackWork said:


> There may be repercussions from bringing your politics into the workplace. I've been able to keep my mouth shut for 20 years.
> 
> "Being true to yourself" is just silly bravado.


That's your opinion and you are entitled to it, but I guess we have very different outlooks on life..


I would class myself as right of centre and I think I have a good sense of justice/injustice.

I am in a fairly moderate Union here in the UK, but looking back to the 70's and 80's I can see that the more militant Unions needed their wings clipped as they were usurping the political process and bringing the country to its knees. 

However that said, I also saw some of injustices/ erosion of rights being carried out by the bosses of large company's who made vast profits but tried at every instance to screw their work force.

Some where, there has to be centre ground...I don't want a Union that is using my dues to further a socialist/communist agenda by using industrial action to weaken or even bring down the government of the day. 

Some of the Unions in the UK were so militant they drove big businesses away which is no good for the country or us as workers..

Getting back to the Right To Work laws mentioned here...From what I've read I would say they have swung to far the other way.

Doing away with "closed shops" I can understand and even support, but if a person is not in a Union, the Union should surely not be expected to serve them? If a non union employee faces a disciplinary in work, there is no way the Union should be required to support them.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

drsparky said:


> I made the mistake of asking why we were giving a donation to the guy running for reelection for sheriff, the answer "he is a democrat and we support all democrats". I was about run out of the hall and called "that damn republican" for even questioning the offices judgment. (I'm a registered independent)
> Years later I swapped my ticket to Maine and my old BA called my new hall to tell them I was a fine electrician but to watch out because I was a trouble making damn republican. You learn to shut up and vote the line.


An ultra-conservative member here was very vocal about the support of Democrats and abortion. He had 3 sons in the local when he started his complaining. Two of his sons were apprentices and got stuck with the worse of the worse jobs, doing basically ditch digging for 4 years.

Most conservatives keep their mouth shut in regards to how their dues are spent.


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

I live in a very anti union area now but I’ve worked in both types of shops including in New Jersey.

I’ve seen unions do some shameless things to their members. I’ve also seen some managers do some of the most despicable things to the union workers. I hate the whole system. At its core it pits workers against managers and encourages both sides to fight over stupid petty crap. Any company that has a union at some point deserved it. Some of those same bastards still walk this Earth. So we still have unions because it is often a necessary evil but still evil. But because it puts everybody against each other we’re stuck with them.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Switchgear277 (Mar 18, 2017)

paulengr said:


> I live in a very anti union area now but I’ve worked in both types of shops including in New Jersey.
> 
> I’ve seen unions do some shameless things to their members. I’ve also seen some managers do some of the most despicable things to the union workers. I hate the whole system. At its core it pits workers against managers and encourages both sides to fight over stupid petty crap. Any company that has a union at some point deserved it. Some of those same bastards still walk this Earth. So we still have unions because it is often a necessary evil but still evil. But because it puts everybody against each other we’re stuck with them.
> 
> ...


 during the industrial revolution the workers baned together through solidarity 
And helped form unions bc they were dying and working in unsafe conditions while working for low wages . 

The men dyed during strikes and helped pave the way for rights that workers have that some take for granted .

Child labor, 40hr ot, weekends, social security , benefits , safe conditions , etc 

When the unions became strong yes their was some corruption 

But by no means any wear near the amount of corruption and evil that 
The greed of the corporates have 
Rained down on the working class .

With out unions the greedy corporations will run wild and push the standard of living down so far it will be scary . Look at Walmart as an ex why do you think they hate unions so much 

Bc they are prime ex of corpate greed


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

joebanana said:


> Government, or "public sector" workers should be forbidden to organize. They'd be better off. Look at Congress for example, $187,000/yr. ain't from "collective bargaining". At the same time, that salary isn't enough to amount to multimillionaire status either. How does _that_ happen?


In a way . they (congress) are organized. 
Their sponsors (stewards) are the corp lobbyists
The pay raises come every 3 years in the form of "COLA's.
The benefits are crazy out of this world, which include
a safety net for _"legal fees"_ when busted in a sex 
scandal?

Show me a unorganized group with this level of 
representation $$ and bennies ...I dare you to even try.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

kg7879 said:


> They can sign book 3 in a RTW. I do not know of one dispatcher that would help them. As soon as they stated their position that conversation would go down hill fast.


That would have to take a little bit of ignorance a little bit 
of attitude and a great big disillusion of how big one
thinks his balls are to walk into a hall and sign that book.

What a waste of gas money:vs_laugh:


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

drsparky said:


> I made the mistake of asking why we were giving a donation to the guy running for reelection for sheriff, the answer "he is a democrat and we support all democrats". I was about run out of the hall and called "that damn republican" for even questioning the offices judgment. (I'm a registered independent)
> Years later I swapped my ticket to Maine and my old BA called my new hall to tell them I was a fine electrician but to watch out because I was a trouble making damn republican. You learn to shut up and vote the line.


That right there is BS that no union member 
should have to put up with and is on my personal
tipping scale of one way union officers get out 
of hand and cross lines they shouldn't be crossing


----------



## Switchgear277 (Mar 18, 2017)

i Disagree with this in my opion the reason why certain locals are stronger than others is bc they are able to use their politacal connections to pass pla’s and certain bills that help keep their territories union strong it is essential 
That the local helps ppl get out in office that will bck the unions and help us in the future .

I agree that a lot of the times it seems like the dems say they will help unions and take the money and run , but from what I see the rep deff 
Do not help aid and are passing bills 
All over to try and weaken the right to collective bargaining , organize ,

With right to wrk , trying to get rid of Davis bacon act prevaling wage , 

So in my opion even if you are a rep 
Bc your views are more conservative. But you feed your family with good wages from being in a union. I would vote witch ever way the union. Suggest to keep us strong . This is just my opion and I respect everyone else’s ,


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

That was quite possibly the most horribly written bunch of words I have ever seen.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Southeast Power said:


> *He's Alive!!*


No, Marc died a few years ago.


----------



## Switchgear277 (Mar 18, 2017)

HackWork said:


> That was quite possibly the most horribly written bunch of words I have ever seen.


My bad I was in a rush when I posted it


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

Switchgear277 said:


> i Disagree with this in my opion the reason why certain locals are stronger than others is bc they are able to use their politacal connections to pass pla’s and certain bills that help keep their territories union strong it is essential
> That the local helps ppl get out in office that will bck the unions and help us in the future .
> 
> I agree that a lot of the times it seems like the dems say they will help unions and take the money and run , but from what I see the rep deff
> ...


I hear you and agree there is a balance between voting
for food to be on your table vs off your table.

I grew up around an industrialized rust belt that was once
booming with union shops , particularly machine shop
industry that was mostly tied into the Detroit
Auto making machine Industry.It's all but gone now.

The issues I had with union reps debating with me about
voting Democrat vs Republican were pretty much along
the lines of cultural issues that alienate me from the 
Democratic Party...pushed me out...handcuffed me if
you will.

IMO , the Dems shot themselves in the foot after 
the 1970's and took on some issues that divided the party


----------



## Switchgear277 (Mar 18, 2017)

In your opion what recent president helped out unions the most , and what party was he from .

It seems a lot that most of the Democrat presidents talk how they will help unions and bck them bc they get their money from the unions .

But when it comes time to passing bills that will help unions progress 
They end up forgetting about all the promises they made . 

Ex Obama or did Obama pass bills that helped unions and I’m wrong .

But either way I’d rather vote for a party that at least talks how they will bck is rather than pass laws to weaken us .


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

Switchgear277 said:


> In your opion what recent president helped out unions the most , and what party was he from .
> 
> It seems a lot that most of the Democrat presidents talk how they will help unions and bck them bc they get their money from the unions .
> 
> ...


I think you're asking me (???)

I am not sure if any president has 
helped the unions. Trump is the
first president I have ever seen 
invite High level Union officers 
to the white house , not only at
all , but particularly right after 
inauguration.

I would like to think this may be 
promising for the labor unions.

He also is calling for kick starting 
apprenticeships as well as re-instituting
various trade training in public schools 
again.

As far as a gradual decline in union membership 
I am of the opinion that it is more than just
one factor..without pointing political blame...

* US jobs being shifted away from the US
which I think is the result of NAFTA...
* RTW status of many staes...
* US policy on trying to make US jobs "High 
Tech" accompanied with my first point
* dwindling middle class , not having money to 
spend , has aided in no economical growth.
No spending = no buying & no building = no jobs

BTW , I was in the 7th grade when Carter was 
president , so I don't recall what his activity for 
unions was. what I do recall is the country seemed 
to go down hill and inflation went up.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

I'm in favor of RTW for one simple reason - it will finally break the back of the public sector unions that are bankrupting so many cities and towns.


----------



## Switchgear277 (Mar 18, 2017)

MTW said:


> I'm in favor of RTW for one simple reason - it will finally break the back of the public sector unions that are bankrupting so many cities and towns.


From what I’m reading it seems to mostly affect public sector and not as much pri sector unions


----------



## Switchgear277 (Mar 18, 2017)

he Democrat presidents talk how they will help unions and bck them bc they get their money from the unions .

But when it comes time to passing bills that will help unions progress 
They end up forgetting about all the promises they made . 

Ex Obama or did Obama pass bills that helped unions and I’m wrong .

But either way I’d rather vote for a party that at least talks how they will bck is rather than pass laws to weaken us .[/quote]

I think you're asking me (???)

I am not sure if any president has 
helped the unions. Trump is the
first president I have ever seen 
invite High level Union officers 
to the white house , not only at
all , but particularly right after 
inauguration.

I would like to think this may be 
promising for the labor unions.

He also is calling for kick starting 
apprenticeships as well as re-instituting
various trade training in public schools 
again.

As far as a gradual decline in union membership 
I am of the opinion that it is more than just
one factor..without pointing political blame...

* US jobs being shifted away from the US
which I think is the result of NAFTA...
* RTW status of many staes...
* US policy on trying to make US jobs "High 
Tech" accompanied with my first point
* dwindling middle class , not having money to 
spend , has aided in no economical growth.
No spending = no buying & no building = no jobs

BTW , I was in the 7th grade when Carter was 
president , so I don't recall what his activity for 
unions was. what I do recall is the country seemed 
to go down hill and inflation went up.[/QUOTE]. 
I agree with everything you said .

A lot of the industrial factory jobs went over seas .

Laws put into place to weaken unions , inflation etc.

Do you think the taxes that trump put in play on imports from China 
And the steel will help out ?


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

I am no economist...If I were i wouldn't be an electrician
so IDK if that ONE thing will help , but maybe he has to
keep taking pieces out of the mess a bit at a time and
then the end result...? we shall see.


----------



## stiffneck (Nov 8, 2015)

MTW said:


> I'm in favor of RTW for one simple reason - it will finally break the back of the public sector unions that are bankrupting so many cities and towns.


So you think we (public sector workers) are all the same?
What's bankrupting St. Louis City is all of these projects for Millionaires and Billionaires. Such as the $100,000,000.00 we (city/county/state) still owe for a Football stadium, that has no Football team. Such as the new baseball stadium for the Baseball Cardinals, who could have wrote a check for it.


----------



## stiffneck (Nov 8, 2015)

Switchgear277 said:


> From what I’m reading it seems to mostly affect public sector and not as much pri sector unions


Each state has different laws. Missouri has always been a right to work for city, county and state workers. Wasn't until August of 2017 that Missouri became a right to work state for private sector workers.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

stiffneck said:


> So you think we (public sector workers) are all the same?
> What's bankrupting St. Louis City is all of these projects for Millionaires and Billionaires. Such as the $100,000,000.00 we (city/county/state) still owe for a Football stadium, that has no Football team. Such as the new baseball stadium for the Baseball Cardinals, who could have wrote a check for it.


I feel your pain about how the NFL rapes and pillages a city

The Browns have zero responsibility to maintain the
stadium...the city foots that bill and they have a very
sweet deal , low cost to them to play there and they have
the balls to ask for a tax paid renovation.

The NFL could just go right to H**l as far I'm concerned
but the suckers keep buying tickets to the ultimate
s**t show on earth ...The Cleveland Browns


----------



## Dan the electricman (Jan 2, 2011)

It's really RTWFLM...right to work for less money...:vs_laugh:


----------



## Norcal (Mar 22, 2007)

We all owe a debt of gratitude to what unions did in the past such as, 40 hr weeks, & other things, but the union leaders of today are just a bunch of thugs no better then the robbers of past that people organized to fight against for better conditions. 

What this country needs is a national right to work law, my right not to join a union is equal to your right to join a union.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Norcal said:


> but the union leaders of today are just a bunch thugs no better then the robbers of past that people organized to fight against for better conditions.


Hyperbole like this will get you nowhere.


----------



## TGGT (Oct 28, 2012)

Norcal said:


> We all owe a debt of gratitude to what unions did in the past such as, 40 hr weeks, & other things, but the union leaders of today are just a bunch of thugs no better then the robbers of past that people organized to fight against for better conditions.
> 
> What this country needs is a national right to work law, my right not to join a union is equal to your right to join a union.


You already have the right to not join a union. 

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------

