3 ms·

This very much misrepresents Right to Work. I'm going to try to answer this without taking a side... The point of Right to Work is to prevent predatory unions

by throwaway2016a 7y ago

This very much misrepresents Right to Work. I'm going to try to answer this without taking a side... The point of Right to Work is to prevent predatory unions from doing things like forcing people to pay dues to them or negotiating preferential treatment only to people who choose to pay dues. Or, say, go without pay during a strike when the worker may indeed rather be working. Of course, this can be a problem because it reduces the collective bargaining power of unions if an employee can simply refuse to strike. But at the same time, it also forces unions to be providing real material value in exchange for their dues since they now have to convince workers that it is worth paying dues instead of being able to extract dues in a mandatory way. You may be confusing what Right to Work is designed for with what opponents of it think will happen if union power is reduced.

rootusrootus 7y ago
> preferential treatment only to people who choose to pay dues Sounds like an effort to bankrupt the unions. > I'm going to try to answer this without taking a side. > predatory unions Whoops ;-)
- throwaway2016a 7y ago
  >> > predatory unions > Whoops ;-) That's not taking sides. I didn't call all unions predatory. Regardless of how prevalent it is, it is most certainly possible for any organization to be predatory. I'm not claiming if that is 1% or 99%. Just stating that it is X% that Right to Work laws are trying to address. Are you saying that it is impossible for people with power to abuse their power or that union leaders have no power over their members? To me there is a clear disparity in power between union leaders and union members. In fact that disparity is why unions exist because the same disparity exists between employer and employee.
  - danharaj 7y ago
    You say the law is intended to target predatory unions but its actual effect targets all unions. The purpose of a system is what it does.
afthonos 7y ago
> The point of Right to Work is to prevent predatory unions from doing things like forcing people to pay dues to them or negotiating preferential treatment only to people who choose to pay dues. I am puzzled about how you can find both of these predatory. You seem to think the only ethical thing for a union to do is to negotiate rates for everyone, but not require anything in exchange. The word for that is “charity”. This is exactly like requiring insurance companies to accept everyone, including people with ore-existing conditions, but not make the counter-requirement that people get insurance.
- throwaway2016a 7y ago
  The purpose of a union is to provide collective bargaining not make a profit. However, people seem to be assuming what side I am on. I actually see it as OK for unions to negotiate for just their members. Pay dues if you want to enjoy the benefits of membership seems perfectly fine to me. I'm just listing that because that is one of the things Right to Work Laws try to do. I was simply saying that the point of them is not to be able to force people to work 40 hours overtime or get fired. Like the law in this article seems to do and what the parent comment says is equivalent to right to work. Though I will say that I do agree with the parts of Right to Work that makes it so the unions can't make membership a condition of employment or force you to go on strike.

rootusrootus 7y ago

> preferential treatment only to people who choose to pay dues Sounds like an effort to bankrupt the unions. > I'm going to try to answer this without taking a side. > predatory unions Whoops ;-)

throwaway2016a 7y ago
>> > predatory unions > Whoops ;-) That's not taking sides. I didn't call all unions predatory. Regardless of how prevalent it is, it is most certainly possible for any organization to be predatory. I'm not claiming if that is 1% or 99%. Just stating that it is X% that Right to Work laws are trying to address. Are you saying that it is impossible for people with power to abuse their power or that union leaders have no power over their members? To me there is a clear disparity in power between union leaders and union members. In fact that disparity is why unions exist because the same disparity exists between employer and employee.
- danharaj 7y ago
  You say the law is intended to target predatory unions but its actual effect targets all unions. The purpose of a system is what it does.

afthonos 7y ago

> The point of Right to Work is to prevent predatory unions from doing things like forcing people to pay dues to them or negotiating preferential treatment only to people who choose to pay dues. I am puzzled about how you can find both of these predatory. You seem to think the only ethical thing for a union to do is to negotiate rates for everyone, but not require anything in exchange. The word for that is “charity”. This is exactly like requiring insurance companies to accept everyone, including people with ore-existing conditions, but not make the counter-requirement that people get insurance.

throwaway2016a 7y ago
The purpose of a union is to provide collective bargaining not make a profit. However, people seem to be assuming what side I am on. I actually see it as OK for unions to negotiate for just their members. Pay dues if you want to enjoy the benefits of membership seems perfectly fine to me. I'm just listing that because that is one of the things Right to Work Laws try to do. I was simply saying that the point of them is not to be able to force people to work 40 hours overtime or get fired. Like the law in this article seems to do and what the parent comment says is equivalent to right to work. Though I will say that I do agree with the parts of Right to Work that makes it so the unions can't make membership a condition of employment or force you to go on strike.