This billboard went up not long ago along Interstate 70 in Kansas City
Posted on 04/02/2014 6:14:58 AM PDT by MichCapCon
One could hear several varieties of apocalyptical claims while Michigan was in the process of becoming the 24th right-to-work state in the nation.
Rep. Sander Levin called it "frightful ... for the people of the state of Michigan and for the middle class." The Associated Press said it was a "devastating and once-unthinkable defeat to organized labor." And one union in Michigan claimed it was "a violation of the prohibitions against involuntary servitude." In other words, a form of slavery.
Now that the law is in effect, however, and one can see what right-to-work actually does in practice, these claims seem way out of line. Right-to-work is actually quite simple. It prohibits employers from forcing employees to join or pay a fee to a union to keep their job.
The teachers union contract from the Spring Lake school district demonstrates this change. Here's what its pre-right-to-work contract stipulated: "The [school board] agrees that it shall be a condition of employment that all teachers" do one of the following: 1) "[J]oin the Association and pay the periodic dues ... or; 2) not ... join the Association but ... pay it a representation fee in an amount established in accordance with Union procedures." If teachers still failed to pay the fee, however, the school board agreed to "deduct [it] from the [teacher's] wages and remit same to the Association."
Essentially, the option was join or not join, but either way, pay the union. And if you couldn't do that on your own, it was done for you.
The new Spring Lake contract language regarding union membership is very different, but not nearly as radical or detrimental as some critics of right-to-work made this policy out to be. It simply states: "Teachers shall either elect to join the Association and pay the periodic dues, or teachers may elect not to join the Association and not pay dues."
As this contract demonstrates, right-to-work primarily impacts the relationship between employees and their unions. It gives individuals an opportunity to refuse to financially support an organization they do not feel compelled to support. In other words, it establishes unions as voluntary associations, instead of forced associations.
As Vinnie Vernuccio, director of labor policy at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, put it: "Right-to-work does not affect collective bargaining in any way except to take away unions' ability to fire workers for not paying them. It makes unions accountable to their members."
“Right-to-work does not affect collective bargaining in any way except to take away unions’ ability to fire workers for not paying them. It makes unions accountable to their members.”
What a concept! Accountability, amazing thing isn’t it.
Not to mention DemocRAT politicians.
The Associated Press said it was a "devastating and once-unthinkable defeat to organized labor
The Associated Press said it was a "devastating and once-unthinkable defeat to organized crime.
There. Fixed it.
It is so exciting to see Michigan edging away from liberalism and all of its poisons. Thank you for sharing.
What is very important to America is, to rebuild American manufacturing.
Move to states such as Michigan, or Texas, or any of the other pro-Manufacturing centers.
But manufacture here in America.
And more important, buy from American manufacturers.
Buy American.
a violation of the prohibitions against involuntary servitude.” In other words, a form of slavery.
Once again, projection from the left. It seems forcing someone to join a union and pay dues is the involuntary servitude.
Er, no. There is a much more devastating affect from a labor union's perspective. Eliminating the union membership requirement seriously undermines the union seniority system. Seniority is the backbone of the labor union movement. It's how unions enforce discipline within their ranks. Break the seniority system and you've broken the union.
Amen! Toyota manufactures a great truck right here in San Antonio.
Of course, there's always G.M.
I’m just saying.
You’re right.
It doesn’t matter what manufacturer makes it. As long as it’s made here. The thing to remember is, American manufacturers profits also benefit Americans.
So I appreciate your efforts on behalf of a major Japanese manufacturer, but still.
Buy American. Whichever manufacturer you choose to support with your purchase, select wisely.
I prefer to buy American, but if the product stinks or is way too expensive, I will buy the best, most economical product, whatever its country of origin. We don’t do American companies any favors by buying their products if those products are of fecal quality.
Just saying.
Last year America bought something along the lines of 440 billion of Chinese goods and imports.
During the same time, China only bought 122 or so, billion from America. I (believe) that includes farm goods.
Of all the imports to America of goods from Chinese factories, who all pay Chinese employees, none of the factories are entirely owned by Americans.
None. (to the best of my knowledge)
As far as I know, ALL OF THEM need a key 51% or more Chinese ownership.
So we by buying imports, increasingly are simply supporting financially, a massive communist Chinese build-up.
A military buildup, as well as financial.
There are a whole heck of a lot, of veterans right here on FR, and I don’t yet see them paying attention.
But they will.
Eventually.
America cannot buy things from overseas forever.
We just cannot.
During the same time, China only bought 122 or so, billion from America. I (believe) that includes farm goods.
True as far as it goes. But what did the Chinese do with the money they didn't spend on American exports? The only thing they can do with dollars is spend them in America. So they used them to buy Treasury bonds. The dollars came home, but we now owe them to the Chinese. Not good, but at least it's the full story. Ultimately, exports and imports have to balance. If they don't balance in exchange of goods, they balance in debt.
Well and huge investments in America land, and corporations. Which incidentally, are not allowed by Americans in Chinese manufacturers, or Chinese land.
All America purchasing of Chinese manufacturers is done via a Chinese majority owner, to the best of my knowledge.
There is no equivalent to Chinese investment in American land.
We need to bring back America jobs.
There is really no way to avoid this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.