Missouri voters said no to 'right to work.' Republican lawmaker wants it anyway.

a reply to: liejunkie01

All federal jobs require it, as well.
Don't get me started on MWBE.

do you guys really think the name of the party these people are in matters?

are most of you that dense or are you pretending?

a reply to: toysforadults

Well, he is a Republican.

So is Trump, and he pandered to the unions. Didn't he?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: liejunkie01

I love living in a RTW state and think Missouri is really stupid, but it's what they want, so do it.

Do you know what RTW means? It really means right to be fired for any reason what-so-ever. A right to work state literally gives the employer permission to terminate for any reason, including no reason. That's ALL it means.

originally posted by: liejunkie01

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: liejunkie01

I love living in a RTW state and think Missouri is really stupid, but it's what they want, so do it.

I have looked into relocating to a different state. Every single right to work state makes a considerable amount of money less than where I do. Every single one.

The pay scales do not even come remotely close. I just dont understand how someone such as yourself is okay with making less money in a time of skyrocketing inflation and prices of goods.

It seems to be okay if you are an executive at a business in those states though. Just not a skilled tradesman/woman.

You should look at cost of living as a factor then.

You know, how much it actually costs to live in those states as well.

Cost of Living-Adjusted Poverty is higher in Forced-Unionism States.

The Supplemental Poverty Measure

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: liejunkie01

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: liejunkie01

I love living in a RTW state and think Missouri is really stupid, but it's what they want, so do it.

I have looked into relocating to a different state. Every single right to work state makes a considerable amount of money less than where I do. Every single one.

The pay scales do not even come remotely close. I just dont understand how someone such as yourself is okay with making less money in a time of skyrocketing inflation and prices of goods.

It seems to be okay if you are an executive at a business in those states though. Just not a skilled tradesman/woman.

You should look at cost of living as a factor then.

You know, how much it actually costs to live in those states as well.

Cost of Living-Adjusted Poverty is higher in Forced-Unionism States.

The Supplemental Poverty Measure

Missouri has the fourth lowest cost of living in the states. It is a union state. My state is ranked 22nd.

cost of living

The trade wages are significantly lower in right to work states. We are talking an average of about $12 to $14 dollars an hour less in my trade alone. That is equivalent to $480 to $560 a week less in my trade alone.

$2,000 plus dollars a month is a very significant cost of living decrease. The rent in rtw states alone is only about $200 to $500 less a month than my state average according to the chart I just had but lost. Unfortunealty my children are requiring my attention at the moment and if you would like I can look it up again later.

originally posted by: liejunkie01

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: liejunkie01

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: liejunkie01

I love living in a RTW state and think Missouri is really stupid, but it's what they want, so do it.

I have looked into relocating to a different state. Every single right to work state makes a considerable amount of money less than where I do. Every single one.

The pay scales do not even come remotely close. I just dont understand how someone such as yourself is okay with making less money in a time of skyrocketing inflation and prices of goods.

It seems to be okay if you are an executive at a business in those states though. Just not a skilled tradesman/woman.

You should look at cost of living as a factor then.

You know, how much it actually costs to live in those states as well.

Cost of Living-Adjusted Poverty is higher in Forced-Unionism States.

The Supplemental Poverty Measure

Missouri has the fourth lowest cost of living in the states. It is a union state. My state is ranked 22nd.

cost of living

The trade wages are significantly lower in right to work states. We are talking an average of about $12 to $14 dollars an hour less in my trade alone. That is equivalent to $480 to $560 a week less in my trade alone.

$2,000 plus dollars a month is a very significant cost of living decrease. The rent in rtw states alone is only about $200 to $500 less a month than my state average according to the chart I just had but lost. Unfortunealty my children are requiring my attention at the moment and if you would like I can look it up again later.

I have 400 acres. My property taxes are about $600 this year. I have no mortgage.

I make roughly 130k a year.

I have no water, septic, electric, trash or other utility bills besides my internet connection and a landline.

I'm offgrid and solar with a little micro-hydro (two natural springs) and a generator for the winter.

I work at a job that will start you at 90k with no experience.

I live in a right to work state.

I don't think your graph is going to convince me.

I do think you need to re-prioritize if you want to live, instead of working for a living.

Life is not so much about how many dollars you make an hour... it is all about what you do with them.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
The majority of Americans want a damned wall and border security and politicians don't care.

Security, yes. Wall, no. That's a lie.

And a majority of this country didn't want this president, but here we are.

Burlison is just making sure the voters know what they want 😎

a reply to: liejunkie01

Good. I was so disappointed in my fellow mizzurkans when they voted against it. Maybe this time they will understand they can keep paying their dues if they want to keep paying them.

originally posted by: SRPrime

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: liejunkie01

I love living in a RTW state and think Missouri is really stupid, but it's what they want, so do it.

Do you know what RTW means? It really means right to be fired for any reason what-so-ever. A right to work state literally gives the employer permission to terminate for any reason, including no reason. That's ALL it means.

90% of the US workforce (a.k.a. the non-union folks) can already be fired by their employer for any reason. Right to Work has nothing to do with that at all.

a reply to: Lumenari

I have 400 acres. My property taxes are about $600 this year. I have no mortgage. 

I make roughly 130k a year. 

I am glad for you and hope your good fortune coninue.

I have no water, septic, electric, trash or other utility bills besides my internet connection and a landline. 

I'm offgrid and solar with a little micro-hydro (two natural springs) and a generator for the winter. 

I too hope that someday I am off grid such as yourself.

I work at a job that will start you at 90k with no experience. 

We can make that in a good year in the building trades, union of course.

I live in a right to work state. 

It's ok, nobody is perfect.

I don't think your graph is going to convince me. 

You were the one that told me to look into the cost of living in those areas and I did. In my line of work the loss of income is astronomical, in working mans/womans term I guess.

I do think you need to re-prioritize if you want to live, instead of working for a living. 

I do agree that I could use a little prioritizing in my finances and living expenses, but my children are fed and taken care of, we have a decent roof over our heads, and two vehicles, so it's not that bad I guess.

Life is not so much about how many dollars you make an hour... it is all about what you do with them. 

Again I tend to agree, But I do not know your situation and upbringing and you do not know mine. I'll also add to your statement that it really does matter how many dollars you make. If one doesnt make enough to pay the bill's and feed themselves then one cannot afford to set themselves up for a living such as yourself. It can be said that it is up to the individual to make changes in one's life to better their situation, as I have in my life.

It is documented and studied. In Right To Work states building trades and labor involving citizens make a smaller annual income and have less of a foothold on their career conditions.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
a reply to: liejunkie01

Good. I was so disappointed in my fellow mizzurkans when they voted against it. Maybe this time they will understand they can keep paying their dues if they want to keep paying them.

So are you saying that you want to continue enjoying the wage increases and benefits that unions have brought throughout the many decades of fighting for worker rights, and not contribute?

Dont worry the company has your best interest in mind. They will take care of you! They enjoy giving raises and better benefit packages.

Again it's not about dues. It's about big business changing the game in their favor for bigger profit margins and less for the worker. It is a fact. RTW proponents have made an anchor line and dug in saying it's about dues. The gullible masses have fallen for the big business rhetoric and it is much bigger than that of just "dues".

Please tell me how well the middle class is doing since union membership has drastically decreased over the years?

nvm

a reply to: liejunkie01

Right to work still allows unions, so your argument is disingenuous or simply fallacious. What it also allows is to NOT pay dues when you work for a company treating you right. I can NOT fund unions that may not be spending money on politicians and policy that I personally do not like.

a reply to: liejunkie01

Actually, he is a company man.

His wages and benefits are quite aside from union. In fact, if he went union, there are quite a few things he would lose out on. For example, right now, he enjoys the freedom to telecommute as many as two days per week, one solidly since much of his work is electronic correspondence with people across the globe.

Given the need to codify and standardize every single detail of your day in a union contract ... he would lose this flexibility and perk should he ever go union. Either all union employees would have to be given a standard day or two and the same ones by negotiation or none would get them because that is how union operates. There are other aspects of his job that work the same way now.

But if he really feels like getting into it. I should let him go more in depth. He could also go into the absolute hell of being put in a supervisory position for union as compared to company, and the hell goes into more than just hiring and firing thanks to the legalese of union contract.

The right to work legislation being discussed in MO was directed at only public sector "unions", like law enforcement.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Right to work still allows unions, so your argument is disingenuous or simply fallacious.

I never said that right to work states do not allow unions.

I stated that every single right to work state has lower trades wages than union states.

The unions in these states are forced to cut wages and benefits drastically to try to compete with the non union sector. Which in turn only hurts the workers as there is no competition for better pay and benefits.

There is a serious shortage of skilled labor and it directly correlates with pay and benefits. Nobody wants to do back breaking work or have to be trained for years to acquire the skills needed, only to make $15 an hour for a non union company. Sure some companies may pay $17 to $20 an hour, but are the benefits available, is it worth the wear and tear on the body?

The only fallacy here is that people are gullible enough to believe that big business has their best interest in mind and are there for the workers. It is the other way around. But when there is no collective bargaining power there is no incentive for a company to "give in" to the demands of the workers. They can and will fire you instead of paying that raise or whatever the worker would like to improve their way of life. The company will just bring in another non skilled employee and pay them nickels.

a reply to: watchitburn

as no different than the being forced to pay for health insurance I don't need

Are you referring to Obama care?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
The right to work legislation being discussed in MO was directed at only public sector "unions", like law enforcement.

The referendum marks the first chance for the public to weigh in on union powers since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in late June that public sector employees cannot be compelled to pay fees to unions. Missouri's ballot measure would essentially extend that to all private sector employees in the state.

source

It was an attack on all unions.