Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Right to work state
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="brownIEman" data-source="post: 792080" data-attributes="member: 14596"><p>In general, right to work states tend to have lower unemployment, yet lower average wages for those with a job. After factoring cost of living, percentage of people below the poverty level tends to be lower in right to work states. But it seems debatable how much if any of this actually has to do with the right to work status of these states. (BTW, Old brown shoe, taxes tend to be higher in non-right to work state, so I would have a hard time believing your food stamp theory would hold up under scrutiny) </p><p></p><p>There are no legal impediments to a union organizing a workforce in a right to work state. The only difference is that once they have organized, they cannot force represented members to pay them. Hence the problem of the "free-riders". Employees under a bargaining agreement that must be represented by the union but do not need to pay dues. This might then make it harder for unions in these states to fund organizing efforts as they may have fewer resources. </p><p></p><p>On the other hand, it may force the unions in these states to pay closer attention to the wishes of their members. Forcing them to spend more money on working for the employees and less on political campaigns and other efforts the members might not agree with. Due to the fact that they must prove their worth to employees to get their money.</p><p></p><p>I would be curious to see a tally of all the posts on this board about how the union has failed to represent the poster, and what percentage of them come from non-right to work states as apposed to right to work states...?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="brownIEman, post: 792080, member: 14596"] In general, right to work states tend to have lower unemployment, yet lower average wages for those with a job. After factoring cost of living, percentage of people below the poverty level tends to be lower in right to work states. But it seems debatable how much if any of this actually has to do with the right to work status of these states. (BTW, Old brown shoe, taxes tend to be higher in non-right to work state, so I would have a hard time believing your food stamp theory would hold up under scrutiny) There are no legal impediments to a union organizing a workforce in a right to work state. The only difference is that once they have organized, they cannot force represented members to pay them. Hence the problem of the "free-riders". Employees under a bargaining agreement that must be represented by the union but do not need to pay dues. This might then make it harder for unions in these states to fund organizing efforts as they may have fewer resources. On the other hand, it may force the unions in these states to pay closer attention to the wishes of their members. Forcing them to spend more money on working for the employees and less on political campaigns and other efforts the members might not agree with. Due to the fact that they must prove their worth to employees to get their money. I would be curious to see a tally of all the posts on this board about how the union has failed to represent the poster, and what percentage of them come from non-right to work states as apposed to right to work states...? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Right to work state
Top