Just Fred wrote:

Personally, I was always a proponet of collective bargaining and democracy in the workplace:

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday handed organized labor a major victory, deadlocking 4 to 4 in a case that had threatened to cripple the ability of public unions to collect fees from workers who chose not to join and did not want to pay for the unions’ collective bargaining activities.

It was the starkest illustration yet of how the sudden death of Justice Antonin Scalia last month has blocked the power of the court’s four remaining conservatives to move the law to the right.

Do you think workers and organized labor should have the ability to fight for rights in the workplace?
 

 
Private sector unions, absolutely.  Public sector unions, where the taxpayers are funding the pay and benefits, I am totally against unless the taxpayers get to vote on contract proposals.  I also believe anyone should have the right to not be required to pay dues or fees to a union as a condition of employment if they want no part of it.  If the union is a good deal, people will join willingly, no need to strong arm and coerce.

tennyson wrote:

The Man wrote:

Just Fred wrote:

Personally, I was always a proponet of collective bargaining and democracy in the workplace:

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday handed organized labor a major victory, deadlocking 4 to 4 in a case that had threatened to cripple the ability of public unions to collect fees from workers who chose not to join and did not want to pay for the unions’ collective bargaining activities.

It was the starkest illustration yet of how the sudden death of Justice Antonin Scalia last month has blocked the power of the court’s four remaining conservatives to move the law to the right.

Do you think workers and organized labor should have the ability to fight for rights in the workplace?
 

 
Private sector unions, absolutely. Public sector unions, where the taxpayers are funding the pay and benefits, I am totally against unless the taxpayers get to vote on contract proposals. I also believe anyone should have the right to not be required to pay dues or fees to a union as a condition of employment if they want no part of it. If the union is a good deal, people will join willingly, no need to strong arm and coerce.

The current deadlock allowed that practice to continue. 
 

 
I know that.  Doesn't change my personal thoughts on the topic.

Do you believe workers, private or public, should have the right to collectively bargain?

The Man wrote:

Just Fred wrote:

Do you believe workers, private or public, should have the right to collectively bargain?

 
Private, yes, without exception. Public, yes, but if a contract proposal results in increased money to be paid by the taxpayers, the taxpayers should get a vote on the contract, otherwise no.

I would pretty much go along with that as well. 

 

I understand, flowergirl, but I guess my point is that unions are neither 'good' or 'bad', but necessary.  I think most people equate unionization with dealings concerning wages.  That's only part of it.  Unions get involved with working conditions, safety in the workplace, etc. and I think workers deserve a collective voice whether in the private or public sector.

I'm not denying that management and administration can be fair to workers, but I view unionization as a way for workers to voice their collective concerns without the danger of retribution.  It's not always about money.