Printable View
I don't read very much of my local newspaper but I do read this guy. This is from today's "Inside Automotive" column.
This subject was touched upon in a now closed discussion thread.
I don't think it's controversial ...... is it, Bill?
Michigan goes 'Right to Work' - Again | Ed Wallace | Dallas-Fort Worth Automobiles and Cars |...
Jim
My thought is that this thread will be closed so I will make my one and only comment. For the most part I don't have a problem with the private sector unions, but the public sector unions are a different can of worms and their ability to strike against their employers, meaning us, just does not set well with me.:mad:
Having the right to work how can that even be in question, if one has the right to be fed, clothed and housed. I think having the right to work is a given.
By definition, "Right to Work" means that a employees are not required to join a union as a condition of getting or retaining a job. In effect, a general contractor on a large job has the option of hiring a union or non-union sub at his discretion to get a given job done. Without Right to Work the unions can shut down a job for using non-union subs or non-union workers on a given job site. Definitions - Right-to-Work Laws legal definition of Right-to-Work Laws. Right-to-Work Laws synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.Quote:
Originally Posted by pepi
I know what the right to work means when it comes to unions, is was a play on words. The idea of some organization controlling an individuals ability to make an honest living is totally repulsive to me. I grew up with my father belonging to a union, the company Eastern Airlines where are they today? Whatever ones trade is they have the right to use that to make a living and work. I will leave it at that, common sense must prevail.
TEARING APART EASTERN AIRLINES - New York Times
for you Pepi