3 ms·

The owners voting results are legally enforced amongst each other. In right-to-organize states employee voting results are likewise enforced amongst employees.

by cma 4y ago

The owners voting results are legally enforced amongst each other. In right-to-organize states employee voting results are likewise enforced amongst employees. In right-to-work it is a state protected dollar-weighted democracy with all kinds of liability limit gifts and intricate rules for protecting minority shareholds for the owners, and nothing similar for the employees. Democracy of dollars over democarcy of people is the main concern in right to work states, except for Doctors, Lawyers, Accountants, etc. all get union like protections backed by the state and enforced results of voting within their associations, they are the "right" people with enough dollars to have a level of democracy in the workforce.

djbebs 4y ago
Rest assured, I believe agreements between employees should be just as enforceable as agreements between shareholders. Indeed that fits perfectly well in that second point I mentioned.
- cma 4y ago
  In many right to work states the union's contract with the firm can't legally say newly hired workers are to be part of the union's democratic process, paying agreed on dues, etc., so it is an immediate coordination problem that the owner side doesn't have to suffer.
  - djbebs 4y ago
    You're confused. The only thing that right to way means is that employees cannot be forced to contract with the union if they do not want to. It does not prevent them from doing so.
    - cma 4y ago
      Most (all?) right to work states have a law saying the union can't voluntarily contract with the firm to put in terms say new hires would be part of the union and have to pay dues. Alabama for instance blocks such agreements: > Any agreement/combination between employer and labor union or organization denying nonmembers right to work is prohibited; labor organizations cannot require membership, abstention, or payment of union dues. https://www.findlaw.com/state/alabama-law/alabama-right-to-work-laws.html https://www.findlaw.com/state/alabama-law/alabama-right-to-w... Even if the union is unanimous in agreement to require dues and make things a union shop with an agreement that new employees will be in it too (through their employment agreement), that free agreement between union and firm is outlawed, even if it is unanimous. It is a masterstroke of "right-to-work" propaganda that even "I support all free contracts" Ayn Rand people don't know this. Missippi: > State "right-to-work" statutes generally prohibit employers and unions from requiring employees to be union members or pay membership dues membership in order for to get and keep a job. In addition to statutory provisions dating back to 1954, Mississippi had right-to-work guarantees added to the state constitution in 1960. From what I can see such a free agreement between union and business is prohibited in every right-to-work state: https://www.findlaw.com/employment/wages-and-benefits/right-to-work-laws-by-state.html https://www.findlaw.com/employment/wages-and-benefits/right-...

by cma 4y ago

djbebs 4y ago

Rest assured, I believe agreements between employees should be just as enforceable as agreements between shareholders. Indeed that fits perfectly well in that second point I mentioned.

cma 4y ago
In many right to work states the union's contract with the firm can't legally say newly hired workers are to be part of the union's democratic process, paying agreed on dues, etc., so it is an immediate coordination problem that the owner side doesn't have to suffer.
- djbebs 4y ago
  You're confused. The only thing that right to way means is that employees cannot be forced to contract with the union if they do not want to. It does not prevent them from doing so.
  - cma 4y ago
    Most (all?) right to work states have a law saying the union can't voluntarily contract with the firm to put in terms say new hires would be part of the union and have to pay dues. Alabama for instance blocks such agreements: > Any agreement/combination between employer and labor union or organization denying nonmembers right to work is prohibited; labor organizations cannot require membership, abstention, or payment of union dues. https://www.findlaw.com/state/alabama-law/alabama-right-to-work-laws.html https://www.findlaw.com/state/alabama-law/alabama-right-to-w... Even if the union is unanimous in agreement to require dues and make things a union shop with an agreement that new employees will be in it too (through their employment agreement), that free agreement between union and firm is outlawed, even if it is unanimous. It is a masterstroke of "right-to-work" propaganda that even "I support all free contracts" Ayn Rand people don't know this. Missippi: > State "right-to-work" statutes generally prohibit employers and unions from requiring employees to be union members or pay membership dues membership in order for to get and keep a job. In addition to statutory provisions dating back to 1954, Mississippi had right-to-work guarantees added to the state constitution in 1960. From what I can see such a free agreement between union and business is prohibited in every right-to-work state: https://www.findlaw.com/employment/wages-and-benefits/right-to-work-laws-by-state.html https://www.findlaw.com/employment/wages-and-benefits/right-...