Monday's oral arguments before the U.S.
Well, maybe it is time we collectively refuse taxes that pay the salaries of the worthless "representatives" we have in government that allow such travesty.
Very good comment. "Americans for Prosperity" is incomplete: it should be "Americans of the 1% for Prosperity for only Americans in the 1%."
A blow against the unions means more declining standards of living for nearly all workers.
And, this ALEC agenda started where, exactly? What states? Oh, that's right! In the Old Confederate States, of course. Another coincidence, I'm just sure. But, there's so much to be learned about the Old Confederacy's successful Business/Labor Model. Ya know, before The Civil War was fought, right? Ssssshhhheeeessshhh... A person might get the impression this possible " ruling " was about something else, actually. Just guessing.
WaPo sez: "(Scalia) said he doubted whether such fees were necessary to union survival."
— And, of course, nothing is more important to Scalia and his SCROTUS buddies than ensuring the survival of unions.
I'm torn on this one. Sure, it would be great if Abood held, but I think the importance of this case is being wildly overstated in the context of where the labor movement in America stands now. On the other hand, as a radical leftist, I've been a member of a couple of "show unions" who collect dues and do absolutely nothing for their members, and I hated to wave goodbye to every single nickel of that. (Here's looking at you, UAW and Teamsters!).
Honestly, if losing Abood helps contribute to the necessary finish of the old business unions and helps re-energize ground level radicalism and allows for the smaller unions to get a better foothold vis a vis the nearly corporate big unions, then this might not be such a bad outcome. After all, an anti-Abood ruling is going to hurt the fats cats the most by far, and those are the unions that are blocking a great deal of organizing possibilities right now.
I suppose it's a matter of perspective, yes? Anyone else have any unorthodox thoughts on this one?
I thought of that too. What are taxes but union dues for membership in a union that has fewer and fewer benefits every year, and higher dues.
I wonder if this ruling will apply to police unions too.
I do not get it- maybe I am naive- but when is more not enough for the one per cent? Why are these Kochs not just enjoying their money, and giving back to the community rather than looking for another - what yacht?
Disgusting types. And this R. Frederichs who thinks she/he and others can negociate their own wages should go to some other profession, and sure should not be a teacher. If they want to work in the private sector, perhaps they should go into the hi tech or business fields . Teachers make far less than other professions. Also, contrary to popular beliefs, they do not get paid extra for the summer- they just have their pay checks divided up. Shame on these people instead of being grateful to the unions for negociating in the first place. Perhaps these scoundrels want to work for Wal Mart then they can cry that they want their union jobs back! Also, this is about far more than the CTA. It's about the NEA, and all other public unions - possibly including police and firefighters. Yes, the right to work for less states are mostly in the dirty South.
Great idea. We wonder who has the deep pockets? BTW, not the US, but Denmark has been voted as the country with the best standard of living where people are happiest.
It's about teacher's unions and dues, sure. But ALEC has so many tentacles in so many things. They're funders of Hillary Clinton or share her fondness for private-for-profit prisons, school vouchers, open carry laws and stand your ground, strict voter identification rules, more corporate control of our industrialized food and agricultural system, bad litigation reform regarding big tobacco claims, etc. etc. ALEC was also founded by pro-lifers who were homophobic and generally conservative, against same sex marriage and mostly just very bigoted. If you like BP and the oil spill, Keystone XL Friends of Hillary & Bill, R.J Reynolds and a whole host of bad corporate actors; then ALEC is right up your alley. But I apologize to the Old Confederacy States: ALEC came out of Illinois' ex- Goldwater supporters and fan club. You know, like Hillary Rodham Clinton did. Think the Heritage Foundation and a whole bunch of the usual suspects, here. I just think their agenda was much easier to implement in the Old Confederate States. Again, sorry.
Unions have been on the defensive ever since Reagan fired most of the nation's air traffic controllers in 1981. As a public employee, I agree that losing Abood wouldn't be the end of the world. But it would be one more nail in labor's coffin. Scalia thinks it's okay for unions to merely "survive." Already on our knees and reeling, he has no problem dealing us yet another setback.
We have an in-house union where I work. Usually it's quiescent, but in the 1990s we were faced with a really hostile management. They gave us a shitty offer, and I was never prouder than when our members voted it down UNANIMOUSLY in a secret ballot.
I don't know if there is enough interest and understanding of Abood among public employees in general, but if it's defeated, it sure would be amazing if all 22 million public sector workers walked off the job for a day!
How many justices of SCOTUS have been members of a union...public or otherwise? NONE. Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito are corporate sycophants so unions are deemed the "enemy" and only serve to reduce corporate profits. Their mantras: "Workers should just shut up and do their jobs...who cares about safety, benefits, retirement, living wages." History has shown that unions created the middle class and the last four decades have shown union membership plummet thanks to corporate malfeasance (sending jobs overseas, negotiating in bad faith using coercion and threat of job loss, etc.) and the "middle class" is shrinking rapidly. As for the CA teachers crying about having to pay union dues, their complaint will come to bite them in the A_ _ come contract negotiation time. Wonder how unified they will be when faced with a battery of corporate anti-labor attorneys facing them down (school districts would retain them, to be sure)...their "voice" will be reduced to mere squeaks from the corners they'll occupy.
Our workplace is also represented by a union, Teamsters Local 120, so this also hits me close to home. I am grateful for the service our Teamsters can provide to keep our workplace functioning as well as possible. Solidarity forever!
no, youre absolutely right. that doesn't change my experience with them (it just means some are good, some aren't). When was the last decent UAW contract?
I was sort of worried that people might read my post as somehow anti-labor or anti-union, instead of the point I was sure I was making clearly. But that's the internet for ya.
What's the cost to democracy and the population if labor can't unite -- ?
And who profits?
Organized wealth is united in every way possible -- from thousands of right wing organizations created and
funded by the wealthy to the Bilderbergers, from Koch Bros. Tea Party to their NRA.
It costs money - "dues" -- when Elites unite together to bribe our elected officials and buy government.
It costs money to set up any political action and certainly the effort to keep labor disunited is political.
I was a union member all 36 years of my public school teaching career. One of the services unions provide has not been mentioned: personal liability insurance. Children can sometimes be vindictive towards an adult whom they do not like. My union provided over a million dollars worth of insurance included in my dues at no extra cost. Thank goodness I never needed to use it, even though there were close calls. (I knew I couldn't count on support from administration...they worked on one year contracts which made them vulnerable to public opinion.)
I have worked as a substitute teacher for the last six years, and last year I found out it was possible to rejoin the union. I did so immediately, mostly for the insurance. Now I no longer worry about working with the Emotionally Disturbed students in the Special Ed rooms.
sigh. it was beside the point. i understand you want to talk about the relative benefits of even a bad union over a non-unionized shop, but it wasn't what the post you were responding to was addressing. So on that note, I'm letting this tangent go.