Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thebrownblob" data-source="post: 5577148" data-attributes="member: 60485">Understandable and I am nowhere near tribal on any aspect. A lot of this conversation was about card check. Naturally, it’s much more convenient especially for the member for the dues to come directly out of your check. And that’s&nbsp; usually negotiated item in a contract. The main idea here was that not having it destroys the ability for unions to exist, which I don’t really agree with. It makes it more inconvenient yes. Florida taking away card check from some of the contracts does not mean they will not be a union. And I think I stated I’m certain there will be lawsuits to decide if what they did was legal or not.As to whether or not public unions should exist, my opinion, is everyone should have the right to have a voice and respect in the workplace.It’s important to remember that when one side has too much power in negotiations, it gets away from the main point of representation, which is fairness, so that both sides can flourish in the life of a contract.The public pension, issue is a good example of what happens when politicians kick the can down the road for the next group, leaving the taxpayers on the hook for promises made that can’t be kept. And the members retirement shaky. My main thesis is that public union contracts should be negotiated differently, and not with the group of politicians, who may only have political aspirations as their motives. It eventually destroys both sides.[URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.clevelandfed.org/publications/economic-commentary/2017/ec-201716-pensions-when-states-default[/URL][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/105383/addressing-and-avoiding-severe-fiscal-stress-in-public-pension-plans.pdf[/URL][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/how-politicians-hurt-your-public-pension-plan[/URL]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thebrownblob, post: 5577148, member: 60485"] Understandable and I am nowhere near tribal on any aspect. A lot of this conversation was about card check. Naturally, it’s much more convenient especially for the member for the dues to come directly out of your check. And that’s usually negotiated item in a contract. The main idea here was that not having it destroys the ability for unions to exist, which I don’t really agree with. It makes it more inconvenient yes. Florida taking away card check from some of the contracts does not mean they will not be a union. And I think I stated I’m certain there will be lawsuits to decide if what they did was legal or not. As to whether or not public unions should exist, my opinion, is everyone should have the right to have a voice and respect in the workplace. It’s important to remember that when one side has too much power in negotiations, it gets away from the main point of representation, which is fairness, so that both sides can flourish in the life of a contract. The public pension, issue is a good example of what happens when politicians kick the can down the road for the next group, leaving the taxpayers on the hook for promises made that can’t be kept. And the members retirement shaky. My main thesis is that public union contracts should be negotiated differently, and not with the group of politicians, who may only have political aspirations as their motives. It eventually destroys both sides. [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.clevelandfed.org/publications/economic-commentary/2017/ec-201716-pensions-when-states-default[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/105383/addressing-and-avoiding-severe-fiscal-stress-in-public-pension-plans.pdf[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/how-politicians-hurt-your-public-pension-plan[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification