GM Strike
How does everyone feel about all the GM union members on strike placing nails and screws out onto the streets that their customers who keep them employed drive on? Causing damage to multiple vehicles....
Forum Discussion
JRscooby wrote:
Unions do spend a lot of money to rent politicians. But the amount shrinks a lot when you compare to the amount spent by corporations.
ShinerBock wrote:
This is false. At least in this case with GM versus UAW. The UAW spends considerably more on politicians and lobbying than GM. In fact, they spend a little more than GM, Ford, and FCA combined most years. I thought the same as you because that is what a union pamphlet told me, but found it to be false when I verified it.
You are comparing one union to companies in one industry. Look up the numbers for all corporations vs all unions. Lobbying to say get a judge on the court that thinks a driver should die in a broke down truck, and be fired if he gets a ride to safety, might help a auto company when a worker gets hurt.
JRscooby wrote:
One of the things one party wants to do is pass the "right to freeload" laws that require the unions to represent all workers, even if the workers do not pay dues. If a worker must have the protections without paying, this will reduce the amount of donations to the other party. The only solution I can see is some kind of public finance of campaigns.
There is no law stating that the union has to represent the non-union member in Texas according to Texas Labor Code 101.001. I would check to verify this in other states if you were told that by your union. I am not saying your union is purposely lying to you. I am just saying the unions that I have dealt with have in order to increase membership and profits.
Well, I have not looked in Texas. But I have studied a little in Ks, (enough to know what I would have to do if I put a driver in my truck in that state) I read repeatedly the law the people of Mo would not let our legislature put in force. I have read the proposed law circulated by ALEC. In every one, if a company has a contract with a union, all employees get paid the rate of the contract. And if there is a dispute worker/management, the union must represent the worker, even if the worker has decided not to pay dues. This is why I always refer to what is sold as "Right to Work" laws as "Right to Freeload"
BTW, when I heard Mo had passed the law, I was bouncing union haul to union hall to get copies of the petition and collected signatures to get it on the ballot to have the law repealed. And after the law was repealed by a big majority of voters, next legislative session one of the donkeys introduced it again. Why did we stop the tar and feathers?
