Railway Labor Act of 2014 (Law'd) (user search)

MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp

Posts: 6,763

Re: Railway Labor Act of 2014 (Debating)

« on: July 25, 2014, 02:55:21 PM »

As long as union membership is not mandated I could back this.

Logged

MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp

Posts: 6,763

Re: Railway Labor Act of 2014 (Debating)

« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2014, 11:08:49 PM »

Quote from: HagridOfTheDeep on July 29, 2014, 10:52:59 PM

Quote from: JCL and the Geologist on July 25, 2014, 02:55:21 PM

As long as union membership is not mandated I could back this.

I've always like the Rand Formula in Canada. You don't have to join but you do have to pay. I mean, surely you can admit that free-riders are a problem in RTW jurisdictions...?

Forcing folks to pay union dues who don't want to join is something I'm firmly against.

Logged

MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp

Posts: 6,763

Re: Railway Labor Act of 2014 (Debating)

« Reply #2 on: July 30, 2014, 10:46:37 PM »

Quote from: Senator TNF on July 30, 2014, 08:17:25 AM

Quote from: Senator North Carolina Yankee on July 28, 2014, 11:21:58 AM

Could you give some examples of the differences between the two procedures and which one is objectively superior from the perspective of the workers?

Quote from: Restricted

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As secondary boycotts and intermittent strikes are already legal under Atlasian law (thanks to the repeal of Taft-Hartley), I see no reason as to why we shouldn't go forward with streamlining our collective bargaining process.

Taft-Hartley will be coming back. You can bank on that.

Logged

Pages: [1]

	Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email? May 01, 2024, 03:55:46 AM

News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more