Posted on 02/28/2019 9:42:21 AM PST by buckalfa
“The new law will require unions and union officials to work, to supply their valuable expertise and to provide expensive services for nothing,”
They have to do anything. If they want to keep agitating, let them so it on their own dime.
No one is “forcing” union leadership to do a d*mn thing.
Oh, look, another black-robed tyrant. Impeach this bitch.
Nonsense - her ruling flies in the face of established precedent in the courts finding that right to work laws (where union membership is not a requirement) are perfectly constitutional.
“Judges don’t make political rulings” - Justice Roberts projected.
A judge appointed by a democRat governor. What a surprise!
I thought her decision was bad. Then I read her reasoning and I realized it is not a bad decision. What it is is a stooooopid decision. Her reasoning behind it is laughable.
I think we’ve found AOC’s long lost identical twin.
“The new law will require unions and union officials to work, to supply their valuable expertise and to provide expensive services for nothing,”
—
Valuable expertise? at what? Extortion, beatings, bribery, theft, yeah, right, expertise.. Haaa.
Once MI and WI passed RTW it was all over but the shouting for the liberal puke unions, RTW is here to stay!
We can’t have our law enforcement people endangered, their families must not have to love in fear. It is time to eradicate MS-13 and every gang or organization which might threaten LE. This must be a nationwide thrust. No more “Mr. Nice Guy” when dealing with them - to the gallows!!!
Did you post on the wrong thread?
This idiot judge is saying that you should be compelled to pay money to people you are not involved with? That’s like if I had a crime watch group with 6 neighbors paying money for warning signs and cameras to catch thieves, and it catches a neighbor’s porch that wasn’t involved with us having something stolen from it, and that video footage catches the crook. Does that neighbor have to now pay into the neighborhood watch because they “benefited”?
The company has the right to not extend the benefits from whatever the union contracts stipulate to the non-union people if they dont want, but if they do, then so what? Maybe they just do it to keep everything uniform.
I recall reading supreme court oral arguments over very similar issues. Can’t recall if a ruling has already been made on that, or if it is still pending.
Ha!...unions. I went to work for a major railroad late 1995 in a small town. The culture did not like outsiders...leaders, managers, and coworkers. I stuck it out for 18 years. Dealing with discrimination, retaliation, blacklisting, hostile work environment, etc. Over these years I cried and begged my ‘union’ to help (I had to pay dues as a condition of employment). I got squat. The union said they did not have the resources to help those they deem could themselves. I was labeled this because I was ex-military and and a fighter. After those years, i folded and was medically retired due to the stresses I endured. Now in my late 50s, my life-career is over. I have no positive feeling for my representatives I paid so much for.
Sorry, just venting.
“Bailey concluded that association would not be forced on anyone. Instead, the judge wrote, the fees collected by unions “essentially function as taxes on collective bargaining members for the costs of ‘legislative’ and governmental services.”
In other words, in the opinion of this judge, citizens of West Virginia do not have a right to select the services they wish to purchase and unions have the authority to levy taxes on the citizens of West Virginia. Assuming Bailey is an attorney, I’m thinking she failed Logic 101.
West Virginia court precedents, or Federal/Supreme Court precedents?
Because she based her decision on her interpretation of West Virginia's constitution, so federal court decisions regarding the U.S. Constitution are not controlling even if the issues seem identical.
This is purely a matter of West Virginia law. She's still wrong as hell, but that ultimately has to be decided by the WV Supreme Court.
Yes, I did - thanks for the notice
Republicans had two years to pass the National Right to Work Act. Many co-sponsors. But they didn’t push. Now this. First of many court challenges...
Seems this ruling is contrary to the Supreme Court ruling a year or so ago that states people do not have to join the union or pay union dues in order to work somewhere. But then, as with all liberal judges, they only comply with the Supreme Court when they want to. These blacked robe activists need to be removed — completely.
Yes, I did - thanks for the notice
*******
LOL........
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.