The Truth About Right to Work (for less) in Indiana

[hypocrisy]

Imagine them trying to use our hard bargained wages and benefits as a baseline and finding out the reality of what UPS would like to pay them.

 

[brown_trousers]

Imagine them trying to use our hard bargained wages and benefits as a baseline and finding out the reality of what UPS would like to pay them.

Imagine the concept of freedom, within ups

 

[PobreCarlos]

Right-to-work would be a great thing if they didn't require the union to still represent someone who doesn't join. They should amend that law so that a person has a right to choose not to be union (but with no representation from the union, and they would negotiate their own wages and benefits). That's the way the law should have been written in the first place.

It doesn't matter if the person is an idiot for not joining, this is America, we should have the freedom to be idiots if we choose to be!

The law does NOT require unions to represent someone who doesn't join now, UNLESS unions ask for "sole representative" status, via an election and subsequent certification. If they're willing to forego that "sole (or "exclusive") representative" status, they can just represent their members. Note the recent temporary "decertification" of the NFL Players Assoc., by way of example.

Are unions likely to go that route? Think we all know the answer to that one! They apparently feel that they can't continue to exist without being able to coerce everyone in the workplace into their "bargaining" domain.

Because of that, I always get a kick out of unionists talking about "freeloaders", because in non-RTW situations, unions would appear to be the biggest freeloaders of them all. They "freeload" outrageously on those who wouldn't choose to contribute to the union OR EVEN BE "REPRESENTED" by them if they had a choice. Think the "go-getters" don't feel held-back by being compensated at the level of the mean? Think they want "representation" that limits the compensation they could earn based on their MERITS?

Anyway, don't blame "the law", or the "RTW" people for the "representation" situation; the unions themselves have demanded it and insisted that it be maintained. And, in truth, I believe such labor lights as Samuel G considered that legal exclusive representation status was a condition that would corrupt the labor movement, in that it would create organizations of "unions" that are anything but.

Make no mistake; if unions really wanted to just represent their members, they could choose to do so in not much more than a New York minute. But the key word there is "choose". Won't happen. Unions today seem to think that they can't function on a voluntary membership basis....and that's a pity.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Right-to-work would be a great thing if they didn't require the union to still represent someone who doesn't join. They should amend that law so that a person has a right to choose not to be union (but with no representation from the union, and they would negotiate their own wages and benefits). That's the way the law should have been written in the first place.

It doesn't matter if the person is an idiot for not joining, this is America, we should have the freedom to be idiots if we choose to be!

My take on that is if the union was really needed AND if they showed their worth then those that aren't paying dues would eventually start paying. And by the way......I've been a dues paying member since 2000.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

My take on that is if the union was really needed AND if they showed their worth then those that aren't paying dues would eventually start paying. And by the way......I've been a dues paying member since 2000. It was my choice to make and I feel like I chose wisely. That doesn't mean someone else should be forced to join like like some of you were brainwashed to believe.

 

[hypocrisy]

My take on that is if the union was really needed AND if they showed their worth then those that aren't paying dues would eventually start paying. And by the way......I've been a dues paying member since 2000.

So you would hamstring Unions and expect them to deliver? You seriously just don't have an understanding about how collective bargaining works. I've worked in areas where the Union was and is desperately needed, and they have more than delivered. Those RTW freeloaders still won't join. Their sense of entitlement is just nauseating.

Hey Mr. Employer, I know you have 10,000 bargaining unit workers but I have 100 dues paying members here ready to strike if you won't cave in to our demands! What's it going to be?

As for delivering, they already have. Geez man, just look at our non-Union competition and show me that the grass is greener. It just amazes me how many people who work at UPS take for granted what the Teamsters have won in our contracts.

Thanks for your membership, but your dialogue isn't exactly helping the cause. Careful what you wish for, maybe you'll get your way and will live with the consequences. I hope I retire before that happens and then I can read all about it on these forums.

 

[brown_trousers]

As for delivering, they already have. Geez man, just look at our non-Union competition and show me that the grass is greener. It just amazes me how many people who work at UPS take for granted what the Teamsters have won in our contracts.

So I should be forced to water and fertilize your grass to keep it green?... Maybe I like my UPS grass yellow

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

So you would hamstring Unions and expect them to deliver? You seriously just don't have an understanding about how collective bargaining works. I've worked in areas where the Union was and is desperately needed, and they have more than delivered. Those RTW freeloaders still won't join. Their sense of entitlement is just nauseating.

Hey Mr. Employer, I know you have 10,000 bargaining unit workers but I have 100 dues paying members here ready to strike if you won't cave in to our demands! What's it going to be?

As for delivering, they already have. Geez man, just look at our non-Union competition and show me that the grass is greener. It just amazes me how many people who work at UPS take for granted what the Teamsters have won in our contracts.

Thanks for your membership, but your dialogue isn't exactly helping the cause. Careful what you wish for, maybe you'll get your way and will live with the consequences. I hope I retire before that happens and then I can read all about it on these forums.

I didn't hamstring unions. I definitely hamstring FORCED union membership. And forcing someone to join is not exactly a "collective". It's mob rule if anything.

 

[PobreCarlos]

Hey Mr. Employer, I know you have 10,000 bargaining unit workers but I have 100 dues paying members here ready to strike if you won't cave in to our demands! What's it going to be?
.

You just hit the nail on the head as to why those who aren't inclined to pay union fees are NOT "freeloaders"....and why, in fact, the opposite is true.

The reality is that, collectively bargaining on their own and on the basis of what they're actually worth (i.e. - the value of the labor of a minority of one hundred members), the minority union members probably won't get far. So, instead of the union expending the effort toward making itself more valuable to those otherwise disinclined to join (say by making available recognition to those who's labor is worth more than the mean, or promoting the industry so jobs actually ARE perserved) and creating a VOLUNTARY majority, it normally chooses to use union-favorable law to "freeload" on the backs of those who, left to their own devices, would not choose to support and/or be represented by the unions in the first place.

Not really blaming the unions for taking this approach; their bureaucracy is as much concerned as any other entity in self-survival. But when you start hearing thems speak of "freeloaders", then it's time to take what they say with a LARGE dose of salt.

 

[hypocrisy]

You just hit the nail on the head as to why those who aren't inclined to pay union fees are NOT "freeloaders"....and why, in fact, the opposite is true.

The reality is that, collectively bargaining on their own I love this asinine, completely backwards statement that really demonstrates your lack of understanding about Unions and how they work. You have single-handedly redefined "Oxymoron". Congratulations.

and on the basis of what they're actually worth (i.e. - the value of the labor of a minority of one hundred members), the minority union members probably won't get far. So, instead of the union expending the effort (Read as: "Somehow coming up with money out of thin air to represent and negotiate for workers that don't want to contribute a dime and hope, wish, and beg they will later while freeloading off other members dues from other companies")
toward making itself more valuable to those otherwise disinclined to join (say by making available recognition to those who's labor is worth more than the mean(Ignoring the fact that the Company has every right to implement a production bonus "incentive" plan that they used to have, but have since gutted to it's meaningless; something you should interpret as a sign of things to come if the Union were not there to bargain for our members),

or promoting the industry so jobs actually ARE perserved) (Gee, it sounds like you want some sort of "BUY AMERICAN" program. Wow, never heard of Unions promoting anything like that. Maybe you mean you want them to lobby Congress to protect American jobs and industry? That sounds like a great idea, perhaps we'll look into it. Hey, while we're at it, maybe we should do something about all those Mexican trucks poised to come across the border. Call me crazy, but we'd better jump on that one.)

and creating a VOLUNTARY majority, it normally chooses to use union-favorable law to "freeload" on the backs of those who, left to their own devices, would not choose to support and/or be represented by the unions in the first place. Gee, open your fat contract and show me where you're getting screwed.

Not really blaming the unions for taking this approach; their bureaucracy is as much concerned as any other entity in self-survival. Oh please. As much as your side likes to paint the Union as a bunch of fat mobbed up greasy sleazeballs, the ones I know are motivated more by their passion than a paycheck. Believe me it does not nearly pay enough to be a Business Agent or officer of the Union compared to the avalanche of BS you have to put up with (and the stress it puts on your body and personal life). Even as a Steward I'm entitled to have my dues paid by my local as a small pittance for the work I do but elected to continue to pay. So effectively I pay for the privilege of representing you freeloading non-dues paying bottom feeders.

But when you start hearing thems speak of "freeloaders", then it's time to take what they say with a LARGE dose of salt.

Careful, your sense of entitlement is showing. Until you can show me a non-union company that willingly doles out our industry leading wages, paid vacation benefits that rival teachers (and pay more), excellent sick pay, stellar pension, and cadillac healthcare coverage for friend/t as well as p/t work for the measly less than $20 I pay each week in dues, I say you are all FREELOADING SCUM.

 

[hypocrisy]

I didn't hamstring unions. I definitely hamstring FORCED union membership. And forcing someone to join is not exactly a "collective". It's mob rule if anything.

As has already been discussed ad nauseum, you can not be forced to join but you can be forced to pay your share. I personally feel you should be forced to join so you can vote (and no I will not entertain letting you vote without joining).

If this is mob rule then we could use a lot more of it in this Country.

 

[hypocrisy]

So I should be forced to water and fertilize your grass to keep it green?... Maybe I like my UPS grass yellow

I think I'm going to have to down a bottle of scotch and a handful of painkillers to shut my brain down enough to respond to this post.

 

[brown_trousers]

I think I'm going to have to down a bottle of scotch and a handful of painkillers to shut my brain down enough to respond to this post.

lol.. and you should have the freedom to make that choice as well.

 

[brett636]

It has passed. Time for the whining to end and the protestors to go home. Indiana will be a right to work state.

 

[OptimusPrime]

Hadn't given the issue a whole lot of thought. Really didn't think it would pass. Now that it has, correct me if I am wrong, but I see zero benefit to joining/continuing as a member of the Teamsters. If I am reading this correctly you get the same pay, same benefits package, seniority is treated the same as everyone else, you get Union representation if you want it, and you don't even have to pay a service fee. Pretty sure the legislation specifically outlawed that. And at the end of the week, you get more money in your pocket.

Also, curious as to enrollment numbers in other rtw states. I mean, why the hell would anyone go Union. I assume whole buildings are all non union?

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I am not a Joe Union by any means but even I know that it wouldn't be fair to reap the benefits offered by the union without paying my monthly dues.

 

[Jones]

Hadn't given the issue a whole lot of thought. Really didn't think it would pass. Now that it has, correct me if I am wrong, but I see zero benefit to joining/continuing as a member of the Teamsters. If I am reading this correctly you get the same pay, same benefits package, seniority is treated the same as everyone else, you get Union representation if you want it, and you don't even have to pay a service fee. Pretty sure the legislation specifically outlawed that. And at the end of the week, you get more money in your pocket.

Also, curious as to enrollment numbers in other rtw states. I mean, why the hell would anyone go Union. I assume whole buildings are all non union?

I have a feeling you didn't really think this through before you posted. I'm in a rtw state and most of the drivers in my building are union.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I have a feeling you didn't really think this through before you posted. I'm in a rtw state and most of the drivers in my building are union.

What about the part timers?

 

[Jones]

What about the part timers?

I honestly don't know. I was in the union as a part timer and I seem to remember that most of the other part timers were union as well, but that was quite a few years ago.

 

[Overpaid Union Thug]

Careful, your sense of entitlement is showing. Until you can show me a non-union company that willingly doles out our industry leading wages, paid vacation benefits that rival teachers (and pay more), excellent sick pay, stellar pension, and cadillac healthcare coverage for friend/t as well as p/t work for the measly less than $20 I pay each week in dues, I say you are all FREELOADING SCUM.

Most companies can't afford to dole out our wages and benefits. If they were were all unionized you could bet your shiny gold Karl Marx statue that most would go under or move overseas once the unions intrenched themselves. Sometimes unions ask for too much. But that's not the point of the debate over RTW. I ThANK GOD that your arrogant, socialist, mob rule mentality represents the extreme minority (just look at the dwindling union membership and dwindling support of RTW for proof of that) of America's workforce. We'd be in deep brown otherwise.