The Cellar - Koch Whore: Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - Koch Whore: Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=24600)

Quote:

Florida is a "right to work" state, which means a worker is not forced to join a union. But many public employees do so, and state employers typically withhold union dues from workers' paychecks.

So it's simply a voluntary deduction from the paycheck that is administered by the employer, the government.

Since it's voluntary, it's clear that the Republicans are doing this as a dirty trick to try to siphon money from the Democrats.

I support the stopage of "voluntary deductions" because in the end you know that they are not really voluntary. And public sector unions still exist in Right to Work states. Same in GA where I live. If the government is the employer, and tax dollars come from the payroll, then you are basically taking tax dollars from all persons and giving it to one party, of which the unions overwhelmingly support only Dem canidates and causes. The government should not be involved in this. Let the individuals contribute after they have the money deposited in their own bank accounts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 719647)

I support the stopage of "voluntary deductions" because in the end you know that they are not really voluntary.

Cite please?

The article says they are voluntary. You say they aren't. You need to back that up with a cite.

Quote:

Originally Posted by glatt (Post 719653)

Cite please?

The article says they are voluntary. You say they aren't. You need to back that up with a cite.

The law requires that PAC contributions be volunatry and any check-offs be separated from dues.

I too would like to see a cite where unions have broken the law.

"Florida is a "right to work" state, which means a worker is not forced to join a union. But many public employees do so, and state employers typically withhold union dues from workers' paychecks. A portion of those dues is set aside by their unions for education, community action — and political contributions."

Certainly you guys are not foolish enought to think that the pressure by unions which dominate a work place are truely voluntary? In many places you can't even get a job unless you belong to the union.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced (Post 719658)

The law requires that PAC contributions be volunatry and any check-offs be separated from dues.

I too would like to see a cite where unions have broken the law.

"....state employers typically withhold union dues from workers' paychecks. A portion of those dues is set aside by their unions for education, community action — and political contributions." Wow. Really, how do they separate that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 719672)

I think I explained earlier how dues and voluntary contributions can be checked-off at the same time, then separated, as required by law.

And you still have not provided a cite that any actions by public unions have broken the law.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced (Post 719673)

Who says they had to have broken a law? I stated I am against the state employer taking tax dollars out of the paychecks before the employee is paid and sending that to the union bosses.

Quote:

Under the current labor laws of nearly half of the states, government union officials have been explicitly authorized to force all public employees in a workplace to pay union dues or be fired, as long as a majority of their fellow employees (among those expressing an opinion) support unionization.

Such forced-unionism laws, which Big Labor is now fighting furiously to keep on the books in the face of increasingly intense public opposition, actually trample on, rather than protect, employees' freedom to make personal decisions about unionism.

Union monopoly bargaining, which is encouraged in the public sector under the labor laws of more than 30 states, denies employees who don't want any union the freedom to negotiate directly with their employer.

Forced unionism is not a case of "majority rule." The fact is, when a majority of workers oppose unionization, the pro-union minority, whether they constitute 49% or 1% of the work force, retain the freedom to join and pay dues to a union. But workers who oppose unionization are, whenever they are in the minority, denied freedom of choice about which private organizations they financially support.

Quote:

Federal courts have upheld coercive labor policies like monopoly bargaining and forced-dues payments on the dubious theory that they might foster labor peace, despite acknowledging that these policies infringe on public employees' freedom of association. Walker's proposal significantly moves toward eliminating these infringements.

No U.S. court has ever questioned the prerogative of state governments to prohibit public-sector forced union dues and monopoly bargaining. In a 1974 ruling upholding the constitutionality of North Carolina's public-sector monopoly-bargaining ban, a U.S. District Court explained:

"All citizens have the right to associate in groups and to advocate their special interests to the government. It is something entirely different to grant any one interest group special status and access to the decision-making process."

Union officials and others who share their view that public-sector monopoly bargaining and forced union dues are good public policy have every right to continue resisting the efforts of reform-minded Wisconsinites and their counterparts in other states.

But advocates for the forced-unionism status quo have no plausible grounds to claim that they are defending public employees' "rights." They should drop the pretense.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnal...?id=565192&p=1

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 719677)

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnal...?id=565192&p=1

Mandatory payment of dues is not the same as voluntary contributions for political purposes.

It is really not that hard to understand.

If you claim those contributions are not "voluntary," provide a cite that proves your point.

Obviously this is a big issue or why would the Unions try to fight so hard to defeat prop 75 in Calif?

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/bp_n...f/entire75.pdf

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced (Post 719678)

I have.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 719676)

I stated I am against the state employer taking tax dollars out of the paychecks before the employee is paid and sending that to the union bosses.

But the employee asked the employer to do that.

I ask my employer to put some of my paycheck in my 401k, some of it in checking, and some of it in savings. It's a request I made of my employer. These employees are making a similar request of their employer. It's voluntary. And the Republicans are putting a stop to it, because some of those funds are going to oppose them. The Republicans are claiming it's so people can choose what they want to do with their money, but these are people who have already chosen. The Republicans are just putting barriers in their way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 719681)

I have.

You did?

Where did you cite any facts that voluntary contributions are, as you suggest, not really voluntary?

Quote:

Question: Can I be required to be a union member or pay dues to a union?

Answer: You may not be required to be a union member. But, if you do not work in a Right to Work state, you may be required to pay union fees.

http://www.nrtw.org/a/a_1_p.htm

You may not be required to join, but you may have to pay dues unless you are in a right to work state.