Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

AP: Feds threaten to sue states over union laws


SnyderShrugged

Can you murder without being mentally ill?  

50 members have voted

  1. 1. Can you murder without being mentally ill?

    • Yes
    • It's condition dependent
    • Probably only in the rarest of cases
    • No


Recommended Posts

Doesn't change the reality of what I said. Labor, as represented by unions, used to hold almost equal political power with corporations in this country. That is no longer the case, not even close. :whoknows:

But that's not what you said. You said, "There aren't hardly any union members left in America" which is not accurate. There are over 15 million union workers in the United States. A 12.4% block of the working population (1 in 8!) is a formidable political force. By comparison, the NRA has less than 4 million members.

And don't complain that unions have declined from their Jimmy Hoffa era power base. No sane person wishes the unions could return to that level level of power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A recent strike in the UK within British Airways saw formal balloting being enforced under legislation now in place. This lead to some interesting issues - no matter how often the Union carried out the ballot, BA lawyers would find some kind of technical legal infringement that they would go to court with to get it nullified. This lead to at least a couple of ballot results being thrown out. The Union involved is now starting get smart and being up to speed with all the issues secret balloting can raise. They are now getting ballots that support their motion and the BA lawyers arent so clever any more.

This is all fine and well for a union with a company like BA where the workforce of union members is large enough to be able to afford going back to court time and again with all the costs involved. Something like this could effectively destroy small, localised unions with a small workforce, small income and having no way to take on the big shots on the board. Not exactly a step forward in democracy.

No one can pretend that unions can intimidate people just as the Company can and get involved in petty squabbles but a hell of a lot of what people think of as everyday rights they have in their workplace now were won by people through direct action of unions and other pressure groups. Perhaps people today think they have these benefits because those lovely people up stairs decided to just give it to them as a nice thing to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The percentage of working Americans in a union has dropped from over 33 percent in the 1950s to 12 percent today (and under 8 percent of the private sector workforce).

You may or may not think that is a good thing, that's up to you. The fact remains that the voting percentage and the corresponding political power of the unions has plummeted. Nevertheless, they remain the boogeyman of the ideological right.

That is what I was saying, and there isn't anything "ignorant" about it.

But those workers are far better organized as a political force. I'd say they wield far more wieght than you're giving them credit for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm trying to understand the conflict, but I don't see it (not saying it might not be there though). The federal law, from what I understand from the article, says employers can recognize unions if enough members sign cards sayig they support it.

The state law allows secret ballots for union elections. Now if thiincludes for the start-up of a union, then I see the conflict. But it just seems to be covring elections in an already-established union, which in that case I don't see a conflict. I'm just not sure which of the two it is.

We elect presidents, senators, etc. in secret ballots, so I don't see a problem with elections in an already-established union being secret ballots.

Perhaps just the current party in power coming to the aid of one of their most ardent constituency.

The percentage of working Americans in a union has dropped from over 33 percent in the 1950s to 12 percent today (and under 8 percent of the private sector workforce).

I think it's pretty clear that "workers" just do not want union "representation".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be curious to know how much unions have been supplanted by Professional organizations. For example, I am represented by the AAUP. They negotiate with our administration for our contract, but actually being a member is voluntary (I've actually joined), and you only pay dues if you are member, but get all of the same representation/protection if you aren't. And as all of the faculty aren't members, they can't call a strike (technically, we don't have the ability to strike).

However, the AAUP clearly has a political component to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, so then who was campaigning for public votes?

No one is looking for public votes what they are doing is seeking to find a way to end employer interference (ie threats lies)

Of course if unions would adapt the way they organize they could sell themselves better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...