It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A union shop is a form of a union security clause under which the employer agrees to hire either labor union members or nonmembers but all non-union employees must become union members within a specified period of time or lose their jobs. Use of the union shop varies widely from nation to nation, depending on the level of protection given trade unions in general.
A "right-to-work" law is a statute in the United States that prohibits union security agreements, or agreements between labor unions and employers, that govern the extent to which an established union can require employees' membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring. "Right-to-work" laws do not, as the short phrase might suggest, aim to provide a general guarantee of employment to people seeking work, but rather are a government regulation of the contractual agreements between employers and labor unions that prevents them from excluding non-union workers, or requiring employees to pay a fee to unions that have negotiated the labor contract all the employees work under.
reply to post by tinner07
I'm a retired union worker and if you ask me, the "right-to-work" laws were never really intended to give workers any new "rights," other than the right to reap the benefits offered by union membership without paying their fair share of the cost to operate the union, including those cost incurred when negotiating their benefits.
Now, maybe this wouldn't be such a big issue except that a lot of dues go to things like electioneering. I remember when I was a teacher and belonged to the teachers' union. It was during the Bush/Kerry election. My union dues, without my permission, paid for people to operate call centers where live people would call me and pretty much tell me how to vote. I'll bet you can guess for whom I was to vote. It was always phrased "Your union has determined who the best candidate to vote for ..." Then there were all the mailers telling me to "Vote for Kerry because your job depends on it!"
My dues money went to pay for all of that.
When the same union represents the employees at the big three auto manufacturers, how is that not a conflict of interest?
How can you not say there is potential conflict of interest of interest anytime the union is larger/much more powerful than the entity they're bargaining against?
And how can you defend public workers' unions? In that case, you have a large group of people who vote, their dues go into electioneering to elect candidates who will sit across from their reps to negotiate their contracts, and the terms of those contracts will determine their wages and the dues that will in part fund electioneering for the next campaign ... who provides the wages? Oh, the taxpayer. Who never gets any seat at the table? Oh, the taxpayer ... How is that fair?
So I started thed the union vs. non union thread, From the Kelloggs thread. Union guys making 28 bucks an hour.
What does right to work really mean?
I am a union sheet metal worker and everybody I work with is too. We pay dues, for the most part we al went through our apprenticeship and became journeyman.
I dont get it. Nobody is forced to join our union.
Can somebody explain the big ordeal please
Well, I know what has worked best for me, but other's mileage may vary.
As for which is best for the economy, I don't believe either side's story. For every source you can find that says the RTW states pay equal wages, there is another source saying they earn much less. Personally I don't believe either set of numbers because they will have been massaged by professionals to support the preferred ideology rather than report reality.
But I will say this. If you are a non-union worker in a right to work state you should be required to show evidence that you have personally negotiated every wage and benefit item yourself. And there better be records of the negotiations. Unions are required to keep these records and report them to the DOL, so should everyone else.
And no, saying "I want what they have" is not negotiating.
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
In my opinion, except for the trade unions who supervise education of their workers, the union is there only to funnel money to the democratic party in the USA.