I disagree with the idea of billionaires.
Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
Phillip Upton (philsplace@mastodon.sdf.org)'s status on Monday, 11-Mar-2024 07:42:49 JST Phillip Upton - kaia likes this.
-
Embed this notice
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Monday, 11-Mar-2024 12:25:34 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 I am fine with billionairs and unions. But only when there is right-to-work laws, that is, laws that make it illegal for unions to be forced on employees (which is becoming increasingly common)
-
Embed this notice
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Monday, 11-Mar-2024 13:31:44 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 Right to work means a company can hire non-union workers.. in non-right-to-work states it unions can force businesses into contracts where they are required to only hire union employees, in non-right-to-work states the business is not free to hire non-union workers, and likewise a worker **must** join the union to be hired and the worker does not have the right to refuse members. Likewise if i leave membership of my union after being hired I must be let go.
Cant ever support non-right-to-work states.
-
Embed this notice
cindyyusa (cindyyusa@mastodon.world)'s status on Monday, 11-Mar-2024 13:31:46 JST cindyyusa @freemo @philsplace Right to work states are all about free loading employees. A business does not have to agree to be a union business they can just hire scabs😲
-
Embed this notice
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Monday, 11-Mar-2024 14:21:58 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 There is no such thing as a non-right-to-work state!
Incorrect, there are 23 non-right-to-work states, and 27 right to work states.
Remember you don’t have to work for a union😲 but to let other do the work and get all the goodies, makes you of low character🙃
Depends on the state and the country. In states without right-to-work laws, then unions can (and often do) require a company only hire union workers and have a contract with the company where they are obligated to do so. Non-union workers can not work at such a company.
Sounds like you are describing a state with a right-towork law, which is as it should be. In such states it is as you describe, no one is required to be a member of the union.
-
Embed this notice
cindyyusa (cindyyusa@mastodon.world)'s status on Monday, 11-Mar-2024 14:21:59 JST cindyyusa @freemo @philsplace
There is no such thing as a non-right-to-work state! As a union member, you agree to let the union negotiate for you, then you vote to accept or decline. The company does not have to agree, then a strike or not. Remember you don't have to work for a union😲 but to let other do the work and get all the goodies, makes you of low character🙃 -
Embed this notice
MaybeMyMonkeys (maybemymonkeys@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Mar-2024 15:59:00 JST MaybeMyMonkeys @freemo @cindyyusa @philsplace right to work means every employee can veto which means everyone loses except the employer
-
Embed this notice
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Monday, 11-Mar-2024 15:59:00 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 No thats not what right to work means. Rigbt to work varies from state to state but essentially just means you must be a memeber of the union with a securities agreement to get the job. At a minimum it obligates all employees to pay union dues and support the union even if thry dont want to.
The consequence that has on voti g depends largely on the particular union and state in question.
-
Embed this notice
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Monday, 11-Mar-2024 23:48:23 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 And yojrs is rigbt out of the communist one.
Taking away a persons right to choose for themselves if they want to join a union, shame on you.
-
Embed this notice
freediverx (freediverx@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 11-Mar-2024 23:48:24 JST freediverx @freemo @philsplace
Your position is straight out of the worker exploitation handbook.