Down go unions! About time...

[cyclone24 1,787]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna872971?__twitter_impression=true

[patweisers44 696]

While not an issue I would argue vehemently about, I actual disagree with this ruling. These people will gladly take the benefits that were collectively bargained for on their behalf, but don't want to pay union dues to the people responsible?

 

Also, I think the last thing we need to do to teachers (for example) is to undermine their right to collectively bargain.

[cyclone24 1,787]

While not an issue I would argue vehemently about, I actual disagree with this ruling. These people will gladly take the benefits that were collectively bargained for on their behalf, but don't want to pay union dues to the people responsible?

 

Also, I think the last thing we need to do to teachers (for example) is to undermine their right to collectively bargain.

for the most part I agree with your post I'm just never a fan of forcing people to pay for something they may not want. But I also see your argument.

how will that work for teachers that don't want to pay into it? Do they still get the benefits or are they open to get screwed individually now?

[NorthernVike 2,079]

Good to hear. It's about time. If unions want to survive they will have to entice membership instead of demanding it. Union bosses pay will be slashed and union funds going to politicians will dry up. Win win.

[patweisers44 696]

Good to hear. It's about time. If unions want to survive they will have to entice membership instead of demanding it. Union bosses pay will be slashed and union funds going to politicians will dry up. Win win.

I agree with the part about the politicians.

[Mike Honcho 3,994]

Good to hear. It's about time. If unions want to survive they will have to entice membership instead of demanding it. Union bosses pay will be slashed and union funds going to politicians will dry up. Win win.

 

They didn't demand it, they were charging for the cost of negotiating for the group.

 

 

 

The court has long held that requiring non-union members to pay the full amount of union dues would violate their right of free expression, forcing them to subsidize a union's political activities whether they agree with its goals or not.

But in 1977, the Court said non-union employees could be required to pay a portion of union dues, known as agency fees, to cover the cost of collective bargaining and prevent "free riders" — workers who get the benefits of a union contract without paying for it.

 

 

And I say again, the politicizing of the courts will be a future black mark in our nations history. Way too many decisions of recent years have been determined not by law, logic or precedent but ideology. Not what the framers intended at all.

[Sho Nuff 719]

for the most part I agree with your post I'm just never a fan of forcing people to pay for something they may not want. But I also see your argument.

how will that work for teachers that don't want to pay into it? Do they still get the benefits or are they open to get screwed individually now?

Agree here...I dont like the forced participation. And yiubraise interesting questions. Will also be interesting to see how employers react to this as far as negotiating tactics.

[patweisers44 696]

And I say again, the politicizing of the courts will be a future black mark in our nations history. Way too many decisions of recent years have been determined not by law, logic or precedent but ideology. Not what the framers intended at all.

Its heading the direction of every appeal being filed in the Ninth Circuit Court, ultimately headed to the Supreme Court. Despite leaning conservative, even I see the problem with that.

[Strike 3,932]

I have no problem with this ruling. It's about people who chose not to join the union. For those who think they're reaping benefits the union is gaining them without contributing, how about we let people who opt out of the union the ability to individually negotiate their own pay/benefits. Then the union has nothing to do with it. Of course, once the good teachers start negotiating better deals than the union gets their members the whole thing blows up. But let's be honest here. Unions were good and necessary when people were dieing from coal mine dust. They aren't needed in professional fields such as teaching and law enforcement.

[Strike 3,932]

BTW, for those who think Trump hasn't accomplished much as President, I think this clearly demonstrates that those who saw the SCOTUS as a big deal were right.

[Sho Nuff 719]

BTW, for those who think Trump hasn't accomplished much as President, I think this clearly demonstrates that those who saw the SCOTUS as a big deal were right.

Well, McConnel accomplished blocking Garland. Also, any Republican would have gotten a conservative Justice in.

Sure...Trump chose Gorsuch (and its a good choice) but its not some huge thing jendod to get it there.

[Mike Honcho 3,994]

BTW, for those who think Trump hasn't accomplished much as President, I think this clearly demonstrates that those who saw the SCOTUS as a big deal were right.

 

Rule by judicial fiat, awesome.

 

 

Its heading the direction of every appeal being filed in the Ninth Circuit Court, ultimately headed to the Supreme Court. Despite leaning conservative, even I see the problem with that.

 

 

I would have a problem with this both ways, one of the reasons I was so disgusted by Senator McConnell holding the appointment hostage.

 

Today's ruling was absurd though, they are overturning a previous ruling Abood v. Detroit Board of Education 1977---that the SCOTUS ruled was constitutional 9-0, Cmon, 9 judges appointed by different presidents agree, but 40 years later the 5 conservatives overturn the decision. 40 years ago, they didn't know the law?

 

SCOTUS is supposed to be separate and using SCOTUS like an extension of the party is going to have some ruinous consequences---IMO it already had.

[Mike Honcho 3,994]

Well, McConnel accomplished blocking Garland. Also, any Republican would have gotten a conservative Justice in.

Sure...Trump chose Gorsuch (and its a good choice) but its not some huge thing jendod to get it there.

 

You might want to read some of Gorsuch decisions before thinking he was a good choice.

[Strike 3,932]

 

Rule by judicial fiat, awesome.

 

 

Not at all. Get someone who you think will interpret the constitution the way it should be. Granted, that's gonna have a bias based upon how I think it should be interpreted but compared to the nominees I know Hitlery would have put forth I'm very glad it was Trump that got to nominate the next justice. I hope he gets 1 or 2 more in the next 6 years.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

At least this is aimed at public unions. I hate the all encompassing Right to Work that affects private unions also. And it states that union employees can reap union benefits but do not have to pay dues. That's a load of shlt, because the employees had the option to go work for a non union contractor. I get not forcing people to join one who don't want it in the public sector.

 

I could see teachers wages falling as a result overall though.

[drobeski 3,061]

Boom

[RLLD 3,452]

Unions will need to reinvent themselves. I think there is still a niche they can fill, but the world is evolving past them, they just need to catch up.

 

That members are looking for alternatives should be a big hint that they have a problem, and they need to fix themselves.

[Drizzay 643]

Who's gonna smoke all of those cigarettes without a Union Break to go on?

[MDC 5,874]

The world is passing unions by. Things like employer provided health insurance, pensions and a living wage as passé. Time to get with the times and get used to living hand to mouth one step ahead of bankruptcy.

[drobeski 3,061]

Why are there public unions in the first place ?

Why are tax dollars used to fund political agendas?

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

The world is passing unions by. Things like employer provided health insurance, pensions and a living wage as passé. Time to get with the times and get used to living hand to mouth one step ahead of bankruptcy.

Yep. Local companies are turning to non union construction purely because they are cheaper and they don't have to treat them as well. Doesn't matter that they do a shlt job and we have to fix any major projects they try to handle. The customer just doesn't care about quality any more. If no one cares about quality (especially where these non union fvck ups get people killed or permanently disabled), then it's going to be hard to keep enough work to stay employed

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,480]

This is a great ruling. It's about time.

 

Public unions are nothing more than a fundraising arm of the DNC.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

Nobody, and I mean nobody agrees with public unions. A great day for everyone.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Nobody, and I mean nobody agrees with public unions. A great day for everyone.

the people collecting benefits and or a pension from them may disagree

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

To do otherwise is similar to a closed door shop.

 

Be great and earn the workers' money. Not to mention quit wasting it on trips, massive payouts to lobbyists, etc..

[TimmySmith 2,782]

the people collecting benefits and or a pension from them may disagree

I didn't include the parasites. Fock em, public unions were created to extort money from taxpayers.

[bandrus1 413]

I didn't include the parasites. Fock em, public unions were created to extort money from taxpayers.

 

 

especially police unions

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

I didn't include the parasites. Fock em, public unions were created to extort money from taxpayers.

Oh, cops are parasites then? Hmm.

[Reality 2,710]

Rulings from 40 years ago aren't as relevant today on this particular subject, public unions have evolved into political entities. Free speech issue.

 

Obvious common sense ruling, should have happened sooner. Private unions are a different matter.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

 

 

especially police unions

Ha. Police unions keep the public form really being focked with. You don't know what you're talking about. They are the only form of resistance to mayors and other elected

Officials from really turning the screws.

[Sho Nuff 719]

Rulings from 40 years ago aren't as relevant today on this particular subject, public unions have evolved into political entities. Free speech issue.

 

Obvious common sense ruling, should have happened sooner. Private unions are a different matter.

Yes, my issue with public unions (outside of forced participation) has been that there isnt really someone bargaining on behalf of the taxpayer. Not someone with the taxpayers best interests in mind. Not sure how you really could do that other than a committee/board of elected officials really being the representation.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

Oh, cops are parasites then? Hmm.

Were you always this sad, I really can't remember. TDS? Hmm.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Ha. Police unions keep the public form really being focked with. You don't know what you're talking about. They are the only form of resistance to mayors and other elected

Officials from really turning the screws.

I think he was being facetious

[bandrus1 413]

Ha. Police unions keep the public form really being focked with. You don't know what you're talking about. They are the only form of resistance to mayors and other elected

Officials from really turning the screws.

There it is

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Were you always this sad, I really can't remember. TDS? Hmm.

You are the one who lumped all public union members into the parasite category What a moron

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

There it is

There's what? One guy was, and still is, a dues paying member for 20 plus years and you say things on the internet?

[tanatastic 2,061]

Don’t unions protect workers from unfair treatment or being fired or screwed with? I thought they were universally a good thing.

[Strike 3,932]

Dont unions protect workers from unfair treatment or being fired or screwed with? I thought they were universally a good thing.

You thought wrong.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,480]

Dont unions protect workers from unfair treatment or being fired or screwed with? I thought they were universally a good thing.

There is a reason that unions are synonymous with organized crime.

[MDC 5,874]

Dont unions protect workers from unfair treatment or being fired or screwed with? I thought they were universally a good thing.

That stuff is old news. The wave of the future is contract positions with no time off or benefits.

 

HTH