I suppose it's good, unions force some businesses to hire only union workers
Its people who support Right To Be Fired who want to come in and say "no unions, you can't have these contracts signed, they're illegal now".
Pretty stupid of them. Hard enough to sell lard-laced snack cakes these days without people boycotting your products.
I want to thank them because now it really makes eating some Hostess junk a turn off.
Now imagine the uproar if they had a way to have what the union fought for only apply to union members, that would be interesting watching people complain how they dropped from the union and lost some of their vacation time, took a decent pay cut, and had some of their extra safety equipment taken from them by the company as they were fought for by the union which they were no longer a member of..... Would be fucked up and insightful at the same time.
Originally Posted by Statue of Liberty
Are we allowed to means test for government entitlements (no I do not mean social security as that is not an entitlement).
Are we allowed to drug test people taking the entitlements?
Are we allowed to designate what they can and cannot spend money on if they take money from entitlements?
Taft-Hartley was a compromise between Republicans and Democrats back when compromising was a thing that Congress did. Get over it.
---------- Post added 2013-04-26 at 03:47 PM ----------
You can grant unions whatever power they get from contracts their employers sign.Oh that's just not true and hasn't been for 65 years. You can't grant unions the power to determine who an employer is allowed to hire or who they must fire.
What are you willing to sacrifice?
See:I think just from reading these forums that we can assume Republicans like the constitution... except they prefer to ignore the 14th, 15th, 16th and 24th amendments a lot.
The only amendment they take seriously is the 2nd.