Atomic

[brownmonster]

Walmart hires a lot of people that aren't capable of working other jobs. In fact they've helped move more Americans off of government assistance that any other. Maybe instead of denigrating those employees for wearing a blue apron we should pat them on the back for their hard work instead of being a drain on society.

Which has nothing to do with what I posted.

 

[realbrown1]

They already have that choice. Go work somewhere else. If you don't want to wear a blue apron, don't apply at Walmart.

We live in a free country, yet when you apply to a company that is union and a closed shop, you either have to join the union or go seek employment elsewhere. That is just un-american.
Make the union have to compete to get these workers to join. I think in the long run it will make our union stronger. I also think that this will increase union membership overall.
That take it or leave it attitude you have doesn't work in 2015.

 

[realbrown1]

If this is the ULTIMATE GOAL, then it is backfiring. Union membership is up in RTW states. Employment is up in RTW states.

Sounds to me the union should be touting RTW. It seems to be HELPING unions, not hurting them.

 

[standtall]

If this is the ULTIMATE GOAL, then it is backfiring. Union membership is up in RTW states. Employment is up in RTW states.

Sounds to me the union should be touting RTW. It seems to be HELPING unions, not hurting them.

It's not backfiring. On the contrary, it is working exactly as designed. It's destroying union membership in the U.S. .5% growth in union membership in RTW states. 4.6% decline in pro union states. The growth comes from companys closing union shops in union states and opening the exact same shop in RTW states. Like magic, 4.6% of the Union jobs disappear in prounion states with a measly .5% gain in RTW states. That's a net loss of 4.1% directly due to RTW legislation. RTW KILLS UNION MEMBERSHIP!

 

[Atomic_Smurf]

It's not backfiring. On the contrary, it is working exactly as designed. It's destroying union membership in the U.S. .5% growth in union membership in RTW states. 4.6% decline in pro union states. The growth comes from companys closing union shops in union states and opening the exact same shop in RTW states. Like magic, 4.6% of the Union jobs disappear in prounion states with a measly .5% gain in RTW states. That's a net loss of 4.1% directly due to RTW legislation. RTW KILLS UNION MEMBERSHIP!

Sounds like a tortured admission to what you had been denying at nauseum. Lol...The only part you've yet to grasp is that those are union membership numbers, not employment numbers which causes your "scab" argument to fall flat.

 

[Atomic_Smurf]

Also...saying that non-RTW states are losing businesses to RTW states isn't a very good argument against the law. It simply an example of states losing out for NOT having adopted it.

 

[Atomic_Smurf]

I know how you can fix it all, get a tea partier to run for teamster general president!! I really crack myself up! And your saying that the tea party are workers only real allies would be exactly like me telling you that the gazelles' only real ally is the african lion.

It would be nice to have a union president that respected our founders idea of limited government instead of the big government bozo we have now that enthusiastically supported the Democrats healthcare takeover that's left us with a "unsustainable" plan.

 

[Atomic_Smurf]

Oh , and you making a connection between RTW and the pay increase to the new hires on our most recent contract has as much validity as me saying that I couldn't make my flight to Arizona yesterday because they signed the declaration of independence in 1776. Try again.

I know that ones really gotta hurt. The national negotiation committee recognized that they were going to have to start negotiating a better deal for new hires considering as much as half of all new employees at UPS are being hired in states that give them a choice. Gone are the decades of contracts that left the "unborn" as they are called with no gains whatsoever. After being stagnant for 3 decades you will NEVER see another contract that doesn't win a raise for this group. I'll admit, I would have had trouble making that connection myself had it not been relayed to me in person, in those words, by a nonpartisan member of our negotiation team.

 

[Atomic_Smurf]

RTW gives workers a voice alright, that voice says "I have the right to freeload and not pay dues yet collect the same compensation as the dues paying members which inevitably will undermine the entire union structure (divided and conquer) to the point that the Union has no power to negotiate, therefore it becomes useless. RTW, giving corporations the voice to destroy unions all across this great nation.

I live in a RTW state & not one, not a single one of my coworkers has that "freeloader" attitude. But we hold that card. We know there is leverage in it. We know that our union leaders aren't going to force us into a concessionary contract like they did local 89 in non-RTW Kentucky.

 

[Ron Carey lives on]

Ridiculous

 

[Ron Carey lives on]

To say you hold a card is funny in itself. Are you really that scared of your union leadership, that you would refuse to pay union dues as retaliation. Thats really sad. It also shows your lack of leadership skills in a union shop. You says you can't challenge them, with your great wisdom. Or is the truth your just a tight that doesn't want to pay 85 a month

Sent using BrownCafe App

 

[standtall]

Also...saying that non-RTW states are losing businesses to RTW states isn't a very good argument against the law. It simply an example of states losing out for NOT having adopted it.

It's a typical example of corporate greed, a profitable business runs to a RTW state to avoid paying decent compensation. Don't play stupid on that subject.

 

[Ron Carey lives on]

When the tough gets going, freloaders stop paying. Gutless Cowards

Sent using BrownCafe App

 

[standtall]

Sounds like a tortured admission to what you had been denying at nauseum. Lol...The only part you've yet to grasp is that those are union membership numbers, not employment numbers which causes your "scab" argument to fall flat.

I'm sure those numbers are torturous to hear for you when put into context and thrown in your face. when union work leaves one state for the sole purpose of opening a scab shop in a RTW state to avoid paying contractually negotiated wages and benefits, that is a NET LOSS OF UNION JOBS DIRECTLY CAUSED BY RTW LEGISLATION. Let me say that again in the hope that you can comprehend it, THAT IS A NET LOSS OF UNION JOBS DIRECTLY CAUSED BY RTW LEGISLATION. RTW KILLS UNION MEMBERSHIP.

 

[standtall]

I know that ones really gotta hurt. The national negotiation committee recognized that they were going to have to start negotiating a better deal for new hires considering as much as half of all new employees at UPS are being hired in states that give them a choice. Gone are the decades of contracts that left the "unborn" as they are called with no gains whatsoever. After being stagnant for 3 decades you will NEVER see another contract that doesn't win a raise for this group. I'll admit, I would have had trouble making that connection myself had it not been relayed to me in person, in those words, by a nonpartisan member of our negotiation team.

Smurf, there is NOTHING about your ignorant fantasies about how RTW "should" work that "hurts" me. You're full of sh#@ on the entire subject. We repeatedly prove that as you regurgitate your tea party talking points and they're shot down. Once again, your trying to make the connection between RTW and the most recent contract is hilarious. RTW DESTROYS UNION MEMBERSHIP. Your own numbers prove it. Your argument is dead.

 

[standtall]

I live in a RTW state & not one, not a single one of my coworkers has that "freeloader" attitude. But we hold that card. We know there is leverage in it. We know that our union leaders aren't going to force us into a concessionary contract like they did local 89 in non-RTW Kentucky.

. Local 89 is under the National Master, genius! There supplements were cancelled by the international not there local. Your dues support your local. Your theory that RTW would somehow have solved that is at best, ignorant to the facts. Why don't you try VOTING to change your leadership. That's a novel idea.

 

[standtall]

Also...saying that non-RTW states are losing businesses to RTW states isn't a very good argument against the law. It simply an example of states losing out for NOT having adopted it.

So there we are! Now, faced with the numbers of true lost union jobs due to RTW, now you show your true tea party colors. By your own admittance, a loss of 4.1% of good union jobs that are being replaced by nonunion jobs in RTW states is just fine with you. Your a typical pawn for right wing radicals. You push RTW even when you know it causes a loss of union jobs. Thanks tea party for destroying union labor.

 

[standtall]

Also...saying that non-RTW states are losing businesses to RTW states isn't a very good argument against the law. It simply an example of states losing out for NOT having adopted it.

So your message is, "support RTW, rid our country of this pesky union. We can all work non union and these companies will take care of us out of the goodness of there hearts." Great plan smurf!

 

[realbrown1]

. Local 89 is under the National Master, genius! There supplements were cancelled by the international not there local. Your dues support your local.

In a RTW state, the members at local 89 would have the right to withdraw from the union for any reason. Have the international impose a contract that you have voted down would be a good reason to withdraw from a union that doesn't recognize the wants of the majority of the members of local 89.

Your dues do not just support the local. Part of your dues money gets sent to the marble palace in Washington DC to support the international.

I wouldn't be calling other people "GENIUS" if you don't even seem to be able to understand these two facts.

 

[realbrown1]

So your message is, "support RTW, rid our country of this pesky union. We can all work non union and these companies will take care of us out of the goodness of there hearts." Great plan smurf!

That's not what he is saying.

Can't you argue your point without making up false facts to make your point look better?