If you shop at Costco, you need to be a dues paying member or shop at Wal-Mart. If you own a home, you must pay homeowners insurance, or suffer the consequences if your house burns down. Your neighbor should not have to pay for it if you're working at a good paying job and choosing to not pay your share.
Why should the other members prop up those that willingly choose to scab? That's the reason behind RTW.
Dissent among the members, due to an uneven playing field. The RTW supporters are banking on just the type of disparaging conflict on display here. One pays the dues, 2 get the benefits. How can they ever agree that's fair?
Just because no locals have folded up and failed does not mean there's no danger of it happening. RJ Reynolds and the like used the same argument for decades, until thousands died.
Should we just wait for the tsunami?
Yes, apathy is a huge problem. But people are apathetic about lots of important things, and still someone has to take care of things. The Teamsters that came before us laid the groundwork that we all stand on. Today we are pulling bricks out of the Yellow Brick Road, one at a time and the new employees are coming into an environment that is not pro union at all. When we retire, will we leave the workplace benefits better or worse for them? What mindset will we create for them with our "something for nothing" scabs, indifference at RTW legislation and union busting of all the public employees?
to get our vote and money. Republicans actively attack our rights in the open. Dems do it inadvertently with EPA incentives
When Republican politicians make threatening speeches about moving your job if you become union and billionaires throw up billboards around communities that threaten workers who are about to vote for union representation, THAT IS ONE SIDED FREEDOM FOR REPUBLICANS AND BIG BUSINESS. 
