Politico reports that House Dems are gearing up for a battle over the chairmanship of the Energy and Commerce Committee between Representatives Waxman and Dingell:
The race itself remains a tough one to call. “I’m not even sure the candidates know,” said Washington Rep. Jay Inslee, a Waxman supporter.
And most lawmakers dread picking sides.
Asked who she would be supporting, Rules Chairwoman Louise McIntosh Slaughter of New York exclaimed, “Oh, it’s a secret ballot, thank the Lord.”
But while Slaughter literally praises God for the fact that she can vote in private, she also is a cosponsor of an effort to strip workers of their access to a secret-ballot vote for unionization. Does she even notice the rank hypocrisy?
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Comments
"Practice What You Preach, You Hypocrite"
"Practice What You Preach, You Hypocrite"
H.R. 1696 [109th]: Employee Free Choice Act
This is a Bad Law. Good thing it did not pass. Worrisome thing is it may be re-introduced in 2009
Unions use Intimidation roguery in getting cards signed. They also Lie.
One common appeal is that by signing you are only requesting for a Vote. (Most people are fairly open mined and do not mind granting a issue be brought up to be properly aired)
Unions also like to say they all ready have over 50% and “you need to sign to be covered and to keep your job” when in reality they are no ware near 50%.
Threats like something awful could happen if you do not sign are also common.
So why when it is excepted that political election need to be secret so as to be fair, that we would allow union ballots to be open, for influence and retribution against those who vote counter to the Union?
With a Ripe history of Union’s abusive tactics in organizing and long standing tradition of Independently supervised secret ballots to promote Free and Fair election, Why is this even to be considered but for Union officials desirer to corral more victims in to Forced Union Serfdom..
It is Hypocrite at best and down right criminal for any politician to consider supporting such ideas.
The meaning of Right to Work
I have a question. Although I understand the concept of Right to Work in the context of a person's right to work without being forced to join a union, often people say that in Right to Work states it means that the employer can fire you for no cause. What does the one have to do with the other?? And where does it say in the "Right to Work" legislation that this actually enables employers to fire for no reason? If anyone knows the answer to this, please let me know, because I don't see the connection and I believe I have just been wrongfully terminated (and I work in a Right To Work state). Thanks.
Right to Work and Job Security.
“actually enables employers to fire for no reason? If anyone knows the answer to this, please let me”
Union supports like to say that with out them, people can be fired with out cause.
The real meaning behind that statement is the belief that the Union will stand up for there members.
Truth is, it may be a little harder to let go a Union member than a Non-Union Member, but it also may be easier, I have seen Unions try and roll members out who they believed to not be blind supporters, the Union is also basically a for profit business, and there for often resistance to actually standing up for its members, that cost money and time and the Union would prefer to spend both in increasing cash flow instead of actually defending members rights.
Also, An Employer dose not really want to fire people, that is expensive and finding new people and training them cost a lot.
If one is honest and hard working most businesses will try and keep people even in hard time by moving them to other departs if need be.
I have had both Union Jobs and Non-Union Jobs, I have found it is better to put your trust in yourself as far as keeping a Job rather than in the Union, who I found will stab you in the back for a buck.
So the Answer is, there is No correlation between Right to Work and Job Security, but Union Supporters like to Imagine one.
Union supporters have a vision of employers half mad like some charituer from a B movie.
In reality, that Boss would not last long (I actually had one of those, 2 months after she fired me, her boss Fired her. He was growing tied of losing so many fine employees. – so you see, it self corrects for its self, and the Union really makes No diffrance)
The need for Right to Work
Right to Work is Needed.
I had the Misfortune to once accept a Job where I was required to join the Union.
Despite what some may tell you.
In California and in many other States, if you work for a Union Company, there is no way out. I asked about different thing I heard about, I called the NLRB I called my congressmen. When armed with different option I went to the Union Rep who then responded, “ Oh, that. We do not believe in that and will not follow that law”.
(“File an objection with the union to exercise your rights under the U.S. Supreme Court decision CWA v. Beck. That allows you to pay only the cost of collective bargaining.” This was the ruling I was talking about, but as you will see below, Unions Never obey the Law if it is not in there Advantage. They Flaunt breaking the Law knowing they have more Money and More Lawyers )
We tried to De Certify the Union, but they Made the Company to bar any one from one location from talking to any one at another and in a previous attempt, the Union fearing De Certifications Merged three locals together, so as to create such a Large bargaining unit that De certification would be all most imposable to organize.
I manage to Leave that Industry, but many more are still trapped in the clutches of the Union that dose not serve them.
If Unions are to ever be any thing other than a form of mildly legalized racketeering, then there MUST be a Strictly enforced National Right to Work law.
When Union Members have the Right to associate or Not Associate depending if the Union is able to actually represent them in a positive manner or not, that is when Unions will start to pay attention and represent people.
Till then, the Unions look at its members as simply Sheep to be sheared, the less they have to do and more they can charge means the more profit for there own pockets.
I advise ALL High School and Collage Kids I know, Do not ever take a Job where you have to Join a Union, they will promise you the Moon, they will deliver Hell!
Don't be fooled--
The "right to work" is a lie. It's the right to bring wages down for everyone and sell your soul to the company store (Walmart). These guys are double talking liars. Trust your heart, not the brainwashing PR of the rich who want to drag everybody's wages down and give themselves another raise.
These toadies are sickening, even to their hookers and the little boys they pay for sex!
Fundamentally Corrupt
I am not rich. My thirty-seven years of experience working for a unionized company have drawn me to a very different conclusion. For the first twenty years of my employment there, I was a voluntary member of the union. However, when I realized that the union was nothing more than a leftist special interest group that happened to have an exclusive collective bargaining agreement with my employer and put the interests of the leadership ahead of the member’s interests, I severed my relationship with it.
Union officials had made it very clear to me that they would not tolerate any dissent for the party line. I was treated to lie after lie. Only after ten years of legal action was I able to achieve a measure of compliance with the law. Never mind getting fair and ethical treatment.
Unions have the potential to be a great benefit to workers and the society as a whole. However, the arrogance and corruption of the institution are so widespread and so deep, that only a complete overhaul can fix it. There must be vigorous prosecution of the thugs who dominate the leadership and fundamental changes in the federal statutes that foster compulsion and invite corruption.
These toadies are sickening, even to their hookers and the little boys they pay for sex!
By the way, Mr. Anonymous, would you like to attach your name to the above allegation?
Union vs. Merit
Actually, Unions Bring Wages Down.
The Much less productive Union Shop, where productivity and Quality are discourage, where People are promoted simply on Time Served as compared to merit means that the Company is Much less profitable there by much less able to pay its Employees well.
In a Merit Shop each person can be compensated in proportion to their skill and promoted on their productivity.
In a Union Shop All get held down by the skills of the lest productive or lest ambitious employee.
Union Shop
Please keep in mind that the union pay scale is the LEAST you can be paid by contract. I have been a union member for 33 years and have been paid over union scale numerous times. Why? Because union folks make companies money too, contrary to what the N.R.T.W. folks would lead you to believe. By the way, I was eligible to retire as of two years ago, but, the money is good, I am still healthy and able, the work is safe and honest, and I am only adding to my already fat pension. Geez, what a lousy deal eh? LOL
Stop Bashing National Right to Work Foundation.
Stop Bashing National Right to Work Foundation. It is not some Right Wing organization ran by Big Corporations. It is a Very Middle of the Road Organization funded mainly by working Class people for the Defense of Working Class People and there Rights..
Many of its Members have Jobs where they are required to belong to the Union, so many of your fellow Union members are members, Yes, People you work along side of day in and Day out. They will not tell you that because the Unions would unfairly harass them if they came out about it.
All the National Right to Work foundation wants to do is protect peoples rights.
The Right to choose to or Not a Union with out Harassment, threats or being forced to against ones will.
Also, Have Faith in the American People, they are a lot smarter than you and your Pro Union friends think they are. If a Union is really beneficial to them, they will join, but if the option is given to them, and it is not beneficial, they will choose to not belong.
You need to have some Faith and allow each person to decide for them self of what is best, not force it on them.
I never meet the Man, he died when I was very little, but William Camp, one of the Founders of National Right to Work Foundation lived around where I live. He is Famous for how he would help people, for how he cared. For the many generous deeds he did. Many a Farmer and small business in this area owe there start to him.
It was the Working people, the Mom and Pop store, the 12 cow dairy, the person just getting start that he worked to help, not the Big Corporations.
He was a Proud American, A Hard Worker and a Gifted Man.
(BTW, I happen to know he was a he was a registered Demarcate)
So when you attack the National Right to Work Foundation, You are attacking the Working People of this Country.
Your Neighbors, Friends and Co-Workers.
If it is So Great, Then you should Support Right to Work.
Bismarck really has the center of it, that is, if the Union Works for you, Great, Have at it. But there is NOTHING in Right to work, which is a threat to your relationship with the Union or your Job.
And if the Union really is so great, then many more will choose it of there own free will, not by force.
But do not force Unions on People, and do not dismiss people who do not want the union as if they (That is We) are mislead.
We have Real world Experiences with the Unions, and Very un like yours, They where not good.
Right to Work Protects You, who wants a Union, and It protects Me, Who dose Not. It is the Most Fair, Most Democratic and Most American Answer.
The Force Unions is Totalitarian, a very Un-American Answer, and Very unfair.
P.S. On Union Scale, it is normal for Any pay to an employee above Scale to be Strictly forbidden by the Union. No Mater how much experience a person brings to the Job or how much work they do. You have a very Unique Contract, or your Employer is paying you in violation to the Union Contract.
It's such a great deal
If it's such a great deal, why do unions have to force their services on workers?
Right to work for less!!!!
The term Right to work is mis-leading because if you work for a company that happens to have unions and you "choose" or "wish" not to be a union member or pay dues there are steps you can take to make that happen. Keep in mind however, that if you choose this option and your employer takes corrective action against you (including but not limited to termination) you have NO right to labor representation and the unions contract clauses can not protect you. Meaning, yes you could be fired for your shoes being untied and there is nothing to protect you from it unless you want to go to court and prove that is why you were fired! Good luck with that.
If you live in a right to work state you will notice that wages in your state are considerably lower than those in non-right to work states. This is because companies there do not have to negotiate better wages with the unions. This is what we call Right to work FOR LESS!! People need to understand that we no longer live in the days of Jimmy Hoffa. Stop living in ignorance and educate yourself on what being unionized is really about.
how right you are
I have NEVER seen such a bunch of CRAP as on this site. What UTTER NONSENSE.
How can ANY working person think that NOT being represented by a union is better.
What REALLY appalls me is that they are not satisfied with obtaining substandard wages/benefits/working conditions for 88% of the population, NO, won't be satisfied til they have dragged every last union member to share their sad lot.
What a bunch of delusional thinkers.
That old green eyed monster is alive and well and sponsoring this site, or is it a consortium of 100 million plus CEO's that foots the bill for this sorry excuse of an informative site.
"live in the days of Jimmy Hoffa.” It is much worse now
“understand that we no longer live in the days of Jimmy Hoffa.”
Yes, he was comparatively honest when compared to Union operations to day. It has only gotten worse over time as Unions feel less fear of being prosecuted for there crimes.
Unions also feel less obligation to provide any service to its members to day as compared to then.
Just look at the UAW RECO case involving Freightliner, unfortunately this is not and abbreviation, but a example of Standard Union practice.
The IBEW, the IFWC, the Pipe fitters, the Long shore men, they All do it.
Unions keep wages down for the Working people. They also force many small companies out of business that is why GM signed with the UAW in the first place in the 1930’s. GMC had done some calculations and figured out that many of the companies like Studebaker, Packard, Auburn, Nash, Graham, Overland…. Would not be able to stay in business with the Unions, but that GM could.
It was all about introducing en efficiency in to the system that smaller Automakers could not handle.
It also turned the Factory Worker into a Machine, an Interchangeable Cog.
It is about freedom
Right-to-work laws do not ban unions. A right-to-work law simply makes sure that everyone has a right to join a union but also makes sure that no one can be forced to join or support a union. The freedom to join a union must not be the obligation to join.
In states that do not have a right-to-work law, the union can have you fired for not tendering dues or an agency fee. If you have a religious objection to paying the union, you can file an objection with a federal agency known as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Otherwise, you can file an objection with the union to exercise your rights under the U.S. Supreme Court decision CWA v. Beck. That allows you to pay only the cost of collective bargaining. That is the union dues minus things like political and ideological activities. I went that route in 1986, and with the help of the National Right to Work Foundation, I received my full dues reduction in 1996. It only took ten years! The unions do not routinely follow the law, they have to be forced.
That is untrue unless the union has declined to be the “exclusive bargaining agent.” I have yet to encounter a union in the private sector that has chosen to represent only its voluntary members. The unions have jealously held on to that privilege since the passage of the Wagner Act in 1935.
Under the “exclusive bargaining agent” arrangement, the contract applies to everyone in the bargaining unit. The union is required to provide “fair representation” and the employee is required to pay the dues or agency fee in the case of a Beck objector.
Again, a right-to-work law simply makes sure that everyone has a right to join a union but also makes sure that no one can be forced to join or support a union.