Opinion of "right to work" laws

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Wow, how did the right-wing propaganda machine come up with a name this nice-sounding?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Mega HLs.

[Ban my account ffs!]

"Right to scab" laws.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Some of the most freedomest of laws.

[FloridaRepublican]

Love them.

[Miles]

Freedom Laws.

[LastVoter]

Abuse of the Working class.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

In an ideal world, they wouldn't be needed.  Of course in an ideal world, unions would be much different than they are.  They've largely let government usurp their most useful functions, such as unemployment insurance, skill training, and skill vetting, while keeping mainly those relating to restrain of competition. To a large extent that was a byproduct of the transformation from craft unions to industrial unions.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Freedom Laws.

A Huey Long lover likes right to work!?!?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     A valuable safeguard for workers who seek to avoid union coercion.

[morgieb]

Freedom Laws.

Wut?

HL, obviously.

[Sbane]

LOL apparently this is a "left wing" forum. Ah, some people are just clueless.

Freedom laws BTW......

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Horrible laws. It seems to me that there is a kernel within them that could make for freedom laws if those parts of the economy that are heavily unionized were structured quite differently, but laws are made for the America that we actually have to work with.

[Miles]

Freedom Laws.

A Huey Long lover likes right to work!?!?

I generally don't like unions.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Freedom Laws.

A Huey Long lover likes right to work!?!?

I generally don't like unions.

Whoa!!!

[Redalgo]

At first glance, I would say freedom laws if workers own the businesses at which they are employed. Horrible laws if they do not, unless there are regulations in place which prevent businesses from hiring workers to replace those on strike and ensure union and non-union workers must negotiate their wages and benefits separately with management.

[Frodo]

If there should ever be a litmus test for anyone wishing to run as a Democrat in the South, it should be on repealing so-called 'Right to Work' laws, and other economic issues -regardless of their views on abortion, guns, and gay marriage.  

And as far as Virginia is concerned, we might want to add repealing the Dillon Rule too while we're at it.  

[Sbane]

At first glance, I would say freedom laws if workers own the businesses at which they are employed. Horrible laws if they do not, unless there are regulations in place which prevent businesses from hiring workers to replace those on strike and ensure union and non-union workers must negotiate their wages and benefits separately with management.

I will add that I do agree with this. You shouldn't be able to get union benefits if you don't want to pay your dues. You can have a wage and benefits determined at market rate. But you should have the freedom to not join one if you would not like to.

[tpfkaw]

I find it amusing that lefties always want to ban every possible form of employment discrimination - except discrimination based on union vs. non-union status.

And lean horrible laws, though I have mixed feelings on this because labor unions are no longer voluntary associations of collectively-bargaining workers - an illegal proposition nowadays! - but rather organizations which petition to subject businesses to central planning and divert worker salaries to the Democratic Party.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Horrible, horrible, horrible laws.

[courts]

Basically what Wormy and Ernest said.

[Frodo]

Freedom Laws.

A Huey Long lover likes right to work!?!?

I generally don't like unions.

That's unfortunate. 

I wonder if that attitude towards unions so prevalent among white southerners extends to blacks and Latinos in the South... 

[Redalgo]

I find it amusing that lefties always want to ban every possible form of employment discrimination - except discrimination based on union vs. non-union status.

Generally speaking, I view all organizations with some amount of suspicion. Neither unions nor businesses invariably represent the best interests of individuals or society as a whole. I believe checks and balances are just as useful in the workplace as in government, and that unions and management should compete for the support of workers.

It would be ridiculous for one to pay dues to a union if it fails to offer them satisfying benefits, yet I feel it would be just as objectionable for businesses to marginalize the influence of unions so that they are better poised to dictate to employees the terms of contracts in an authoritarian fashion. To me it seems wiser to favor a regulated process of workplace conflict resolution rather than for one to identify as being staunchly pro or anti-union.

I am open to suggestions for how to better avoid consolidation of excess power by any single faction - though we are likely to differ in our views on what political-economic system can best support the rights of the individual - but in the meanwhile I feel employer discrimination against union or non-union applicants and workers puts them at risk of being coerced into supporting one "side" or another, lessening both employer and union accountability to the interests of labour.

I would be a bit less standoffish toward capitalism if all parties with a stake in a business were to get a fair say in how it operates. So although I voted HL's in the poll, it is not really because I am fundamentally opposed to "right-to-work" principles so much as I disagree with the way in which the policy tends to be implemented in the States.

[opebo]

haha, over 40% of the forum supports slavery.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Freedom Laws.

A Huey Long lover likes right to work!?!?

I generally don't like unions.

Why not? (Not trying to be bellicose, I'm genuinely curious.)