(quoted from post at 07:52:28 02/25/15)
(quoted from post at 15:05:32 02/25/15)
(quoted from post at 06:49:57 02/25/15)
(quoted from post at 14:15:42 02/25/15) If I understand "Right To Work", Non-union employees would have the same benefits & wages as those negotiated by union employees of the same company.
Sounds like Right To Work is a union breaker. JMHO.
In a company that has a unionized labor force the company collects union dues from all the employees and pays it to the union. It's up to the individual employee if he/she wants to be a member or not. The idea here is that the union negotiates for wages, and other work related items for all the workers in the company. Union workers and non-union workers benefit from these negotiations. Since non-union workers get the same befits as the union workers the dues are collected from their checks too. This is called a closed shop. There are also situations where workers get the same benefits as the union workers, but they don't have to pay the dues.
Some states are working on fixing that! Making it so people who opt out of the union don't have to pay for any union activity.
Rick
That's called right to work. But why does an employee that doesn't join the union, or pay any dues, get to have any of the benefits the unions negotiated for?
There are very few "shops" that require a worker to be a union member to get hired. The only one that comes to mind is a steam fitters shop. Working as a steam fitter you had to know what you were doing, or people would get killed from faulty work. So unions were developed to make sure anyone who got a job as a steam fitter was well educated in the do's and don'ts of the job to keep it safe. Once you were a proven steam fitter, joining and being excepted in a steam fitters union was prof that you were qualified to do the job.
In Wisconsin having act ten made into law was akin to slapping a child in the head for spilling their milk. The public workers unions were not the boogie man that they were made out to be. That union had a no strike clause, and no binding aberration. This mean the workers couldn't strike if there was an impasse in the negotiations. If they did they were automatically fired. No binding aberration is used when there is a stalemate in negotiations and a outside arbitrator was called in to decide which way the negotiations were to be settled. Wisconsin public workers had neither of these rights in negotiating for higher wages. They had no leverage, so there was nothing to fear from them. So the governor didn't defeat a big bad union by signing act ten into law.