[quote=KSMountain][quote=flu]Never understood why it would be requirement to join a union in order to be employed for a specific job.
Sounds like extortion to me.[/quote]
Wasn’t this even more limited than that? I’m not an expert, but I read that part of this was to remove the ability for unions to force folks to pay union dues even if they aren’t part of the union. That is crazy! Good riddance to that nonsense.
I saw some other union official in MI yesterday saying “well, these folks will benefit from our representation without paying for it”. Personally, if I want representation, I’ll choose it, hire it, and pay for it myself, thank you very much. And the teamsters probably wouldn’t be my first choice…[/quote]
The unions are right about these freeloaders getting the benefit of representation without paying for it.
Let’s take teachers, for example. A person has the right to work for private non-union schools, public non-union schools (mostly charters), or public union schools. The ones who gravitate toward the union schools do so because they perceive there is a greater benefit to working there — usually better compensation or working conditions, etc. The reason the pay/working conditions tend to be superior is because unions fought for these things. Unions can only fight for workers’ rights if they have funding.
Why should the people who don’t want to join a union benefit from the pay and working conditions earned by unions and their dues-paying members? Let them work at a non-union shop and get whatever they fight for on and individual level (good luck with that!). They are totally free to work for any non-union employer they desire, but they do NOT have a right to the compensation and working conditions earned by dues-paying members. Hell no.
