union as a civil right

[Bonestorm]

Sorry. I should have said he agreed with Walker that they should be limited in the the rights that private sector trade unions enjoy.

I don't think saying he agreed with Walker is accurate.

No, Stalin didn't outlaw trade unions. There were two factions, one that believed that unions should be militarized, the other (the unions led by Alexander Shlyapnikov) that believed that unions should run the economy. Neither side outlawed unions, it just didn't happen. The unions got stronger under the Soviets and under Hitler. This was the Дискуссия о профсоюзах (pronounced deeskoosiya o profosoyuakh which means the Dispute about the unions).

Just saying "Stalin didn't like unions" flat isn't true. Nor is it true that Hitler was against unions. "All of the most dictatorial" regimes flat didn't outlaw unions. (Although Hitler did outlaw Freemasons).

Damo: slapping the label "union" on an instrumentality of totalitarian regime doesn't make it a union as we understand the term. They all outlawed unions as we understand the term and co-opted them.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

unions are opposed to open shop rules......is that a civil right?.....

union rank and file generally votes 50/50 between Democrats and Republicans.....political contributions from mandatory union dues is spent 93/7 in favor of Democrats.....is that a civil right?......

unions are pressing for an end to secret ballots on union formation.....is that a civil right?

And how are these questions even relevent? Those are arguments used by people who want to undermine and eliminate collective bargaining rights by eliminating the mechanisms by which they work. Unions oppose open shops because those who don't pay dues benefit off the backs of those who do and open shops are used ruthlessly by employers to eliminate unions.

How union members vote as individuals privately in public elections is irrelevent to how they operate as an organization or how they vote for their representation in that organization. Union members vote for their representation and if they don't like how that representation operates they are free to elect others to represent them, so that's a strawman argument.

Secret ballots are also used by companies to delay union elections and to bring pressure to bear on employees by threatening their jobs and careers if they support union representation again, a tool the right wing uses to suppress collective bargaining.

Just admit it, you want to deny people their rights to collectively bargain by any means neccessary.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

The only way that "it is a right of association" works is if I have the right to tell them to go jump in it 100%, not even one dime of mine should go to them, if I get a job at a union shop. That "civil rights" thing is a knife that cuts in both directions.

I don't think it will work though, because the unions have gotten laws passed that force people to join them if they want to be employed at places where they have power. Also, Federal Employees have already been through this.

Eeeeh wrong Damo. That only applies if your working under an employment contract. As an "at will" employee it don't work that way. If you don't want a union at your shop then you have the right to vote the unon out or your free to go work some place else.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

It isn't any wonder that unions are pretty much universally outlawed under oppressive, dictatorial regimes.

Oh that certainly goes with out saying. Look at the history of totalitarianism in modern times. The first two groups targeted as enemies of the state by Dictators and other totalitarian regimes are the intellectuals and trade union members.

It probably hasn't excaped your notice that neither of those two groups are to popular with right wing conservatives.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Who here is saying they should be outlawed? I find it interesting that FDR was against public unions. Was he "dictatorial"?

I also wonder if you think the Soviet Union was totalitarian?

Hell fucking yea Soviets were totalitarian. Stalin had the trade unionist put up against walls and shot and no one did more to end Soviet tyranny in eastern Europe then the members of trade unions (or have you forgotten about organizations like Solidarity?).

 

[Mott the Hoople]

He wasn't against public unions. In fact, he said that they served a good and useful purpose, but he was of the view that they should not enjoy all of the rights that private sector trade unions enjoy.




Yes, it was. Stalin outlawed trade unions for a period. They were, however, reinstated and co-opted by the government and served as arms of the government apparatus, much like they do today in China.

When independent trade unions were created, the government tried to crush them (see the Polish Solidarity movement). Indeed the success of the Solidarity movement demonstrates precisely why totalitarian regimes outlaw trade unionism.

That is exactly right.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Secret ballots are also used by companies to delay union elections and to bring pressure to bear on employees by threatening their jobs and careers if they support union representation again, a tool the right wing uses to suppress collective bargaining.
.

That is the biggest load of crap I have ever heard. EVER.

Tell us genius... do you think employees are going to be more or less pressured and strong armed by eliminating their ability to vote in private?

You make it public and EVERYONE... union leaders, corporate leaders and coworkers ALL get go know how you vote. You are batshit crazy if you think that protects the workers.

You are simply spouting off bullshit that is spoon fed to you by iluvunions.com

 

[tinfoil]

Government for the people(not the government employees) by the people (we elect, not the union leaders)

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

That is exactly right.

good... then you agree... they should not have all the rights of the private sector unions.

About time you came to your senses.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I actually have no problem with them bargaining.

Just make sure they are bargaining with the right people.

The taxpayers.

Let them present there case for increased benefits or wage increases above the pace of inflation. Then have a public referendum on it.

Done.

Fine but let's be fair about that. If you're going to go that far then all pay raises or increases in benefits for all Government executives, judicial appointees, executive appointees and elected officials will have to be approved by public referendum too.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander and unless you're willing to agree to that then your proposal has no merit.

 

[Damocles]

I don't think saying he agreed with Walker is accurate.





Damo: slapping the label "union" on an instrumentality of totalitarian regime doesn't make it a union as we understand the term. They all outlawed unions as we understand the term and co-opted them.

But they didn't. You keep trying to say that, but repeating that doesn't make it true. Many of the union leaders became part of the apparatus, and when it all came down to it they simply forced everybody to join unions by the end. The only people not covered directly by unions were the people on the Kholzny (collective farms) and that was because they had their own collective bargaining unit that wasn't a trade union.

The unions were not outlawed in the Soviet Union. Totalitarian regimes often use the already available apparatus to seize more control, but the "outlaw" crap is just imaginary.

 

[Bonestorm]

That is the biggest load of crap I have ever heard. EVER.

Tell us genius... do you think employees are going to be more or less pressured and strong armed by eliminating their ability to vote in private?

You make it public and EVERYONE... union leaders, corporate leaders and coworkers ALL get go know how you vote. You are batshit crazy if you think that protects the workers.

You are simply spouting off bullshit that is spoon fed to you by iluvunions.com

Hmmm:

The authors evaluate policy arguments for and against the use of card check as a method to determine union recognition. The results of an analysis of data from telephone surveys of 430 workers who had been through the NLRB election or card check campaigns of six unions in 2003 indicate that there was little undue union pressure to support unionization in card check campaigns, and that management pressure on workers to oppose unionization was considerably greater than pressure from co-workers or organizers to support the union in both card checks and elections. The authors also find that although workers in card checks do appear to have had somewhat less
information about unions and about the recognition process than workers in elections, workers who felt they had insufficient information to make a decision about unionization tended not to sign cards.

http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1627&context=ilrreview

 

[Damocles]

Hell fucking yea Soviets were totalitarian. Stalin had the trade unionist put up against walls and shot and no one did more to end Soviet tyranny in eastern Europe then the members of trade unions (or have you forgotten about organizations like Solidarity?).

Total rubbish. The unions became stronger and people were forced into them. This is just flat imaginary rubbish. You want it to be true, but it just didn't happen.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

That is the biggest load of crap I have ever heard. EVER.

Tell us genius... do you think employees are going to be more or less pressured and strong armed by eliminating their ability to vote in private?

Man dude, your ignorance is showing. Fucking A right they will, Why do you think companies are so vociferous about secret ballots?

You make it public and EVERYONE... union leaders, corporate leaders and coworkers ALL get go know how you vote. You are batshit crazy if you think that protects the workers.

and your batshit stupid if you don't think it only protects the interest in management.

You are simply spouting off bullshit that is spoon fed to you by iluvunions.com

And your just rationalizing you anti-union sentiments while being completely clueless about the facts and peoples rights.

 

[Damocles]

Man... It's impossible to discuss this without people knowing what actually happened. Trotsky tried to militarize the unions, Lenin and Stalin argued that persuasion was better with the "masses"...

The unions remained, they were never outlawed in the Soviet Union.

 

[Damocles]

Eeeeh wrong Damo. That only applies if your working under an employment contract. As an "at will" employee it don't work that way. If you don't want a union at your shop then you have the right to vote the unon out or your free to go work some place else.

Again. It shouldn't matter if there is a union, if it is a right of association I have a right to simply tell them to go jump in poop. And I'm not "wrong". If they unionized here, I would be forced to join the union. If I filed paperwork to not be part of it I would STILL have to pay them for "representing" me. So long as they have that power, the "right of association" argument they are trying to put forward here doesn't apply.

 

[NOVA]

Man... It's impossible to discuss this without people knowing what actually happened. Trotsky tried to militarize the unions, Lenin and Stalin argued that persuasion was better with the "masses"...

The unions remained, they were never outlawed in the Soviet Union.

Kinda like Michael Moore ?
hahaha

They have a right to organize a union and we have a right to ignore that union....thats fair.

 

[Bonestorm]

But they didn't. You keep trying to say that, but repeating that doesn't make it true. Many of the union leaders became part of the apparatus, and when it all came down to it they simply forced everybody to join unions by the end. The only people not covered directly by unions were the people on the Kholzny (collective farms) and that was because they had their own collective bargaining unit that wasn't a trade union.

The unions were not outlawed in the Soviet Union. Totalitarian regimes often use the already available apparatus to seize more control, but the "outlaw" crap is just imaginary.

Let me clarfiy. Independent trade unions were outlawed. Only government controlled "trade unions" were permitted, and those are not trade unions. They are part of the totalitarian apparatus.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Total rubbish. The unions became stronger and people were forced into them. This is just flat imaginary rubbish. You want it to be true, but it just didn't happen.

Youre insane Damo. It's common knowledge that Stalin co-opted the unions, took the trade union leaders out and had them shot then had them replaced with government appointed apparatchiks and then had those within those unions who agitated or opposed those apparatchiks arrested, imprisoned, exiled to Siberia and in many cases shot. Just because you slap a name on an ogranization and call it a trade union doesn't make it a trade union.

You're just factually wrong Damo.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

good... then you agree... they should not have all the rights of the private sector unions.

About time you came to your senses.

Thank you. You are admitting to the legitimacy of union representation for collective bargaining rights. Now having said that, only an idiot of the first order would deny that public sector workers have the same conflicts of interest with management in the Government sector as they do in the private sector. By admiting to the legitimacy of union representation in the private sector you're admitting to it's legitimacy in the public sector.