3 comments

• 

  tallport

  9 months ago

  What a joke for a Republican like Gov. Owens to pretend that he actually cares about employee rights. He cares about his Republican party and he is tapping uninformed electorate with this nonsense about "choice". His party is bought and sold by powerful corporate interests who do not want to see employees empowered at the grassroots level. He knows it and we know it. I realize there are a lot of 30 second ad voters out there, but many voters will still weigh the facts. Amendment 47 is a free loader bill. Think about it. If I did not vote for my representative, I still have to pay taxes. I do not have the right to free-load with the democratic process. Unions bring democracy to the workplace. Nothing more and nothing less. If the majority of employees vote in a union, the non-members have top pay a fair share free, but CAN remain non-members. That is based on majority rule like any other democratic election. Collective bargaining is what checks and balances and due process of law translate too. Bill Owens and John Andrews and their cronies prefer workplaces to be run more like China. It is cheaper that way and their friends get bigger bonuses and if they want to fire somebody for no reason, so be it.
  reply
• 

  Be Fair

  9 months ago

  Well, I know good people who have differing opinions on this issue. FDR supported proportional representation, meaning different unions could represent different groups of employees, until Sen. Wagner convinced him on majority representation. However, even under the latter, it could reasonably be argued that the cost to an to individual who does not wish to be represented by the bargaining agent of their loss of individual representation cancels out the benefit of the value of such undesired representation. The fallacy is to equate post-union certification collective bargaining with self-governance. Although that was originally envisioned in the Wagner Act, we all know unions do not govern workers and that workers do not administer workplace justice or discipline through unions. Unions are bargaining agents, like lawyers or real estate agents. They just have a privileged ability to retain that status - and collect dues and "voluntary" political contributions for candidates workers may or may not support as individuals and regardless of their "clients'" preferences except under extraordinary circumstances. When it comes to unions, breaking up really is hard to do. But that doesn't mean you can't have separate checking accounts.
  reply
• 

  Jacob T.

  8 months ago

  I am disgusted by Democrats being in the back pocket of the Unions. To me, I agree with most principles and the platform of the Democratic Party. The one single thing I cannot stomach is their cowtowing to organized labor. Hey, Democrats, you guys are better than that. Please break your ties with organized labor and become the true American party, representing the interests of real workers and average citizens. About the only people I know who oppose Amendment 47 are either union stewards or full-time union employees. They are afraid the gravy train of money siphoned off the average worker (involuntarily) will end. The other group opposed are Democratic Party politicians. They receive this money siphoned off from the workers through union contributions to the party. Again, when your money is cut off, you come out against Amendment 47.
  
  Vote Yes on 47, of course!!
  reply