Posted on 03/12/2011 10:32:19 AM PST by GVnana
A group of conservative U.S. senators has introduced a bill to restrict unions from forcing workers to join and pay dues as a condition of employment.
The move on Capitol Hill comes as several states consider what's known as "right-to-work" legislation -- proposals that have met stiff resistance. Indiana Republicans recently shelved their right-to-work bill after it sparked protests at the capital and after Democrats fled the state to block it, mimicking the tactic used by Wisconsin lawmakers holding up Gov. Scott Walker's anti-union proposal.
But GOP senators in Washington said national legislation is needed to stop the "strong-arm political tactics" they claim labor bosses are using to compel new employees into joining their ranks. They introduced the National Right to Work Act Tuesday.
-snip-
DeMint was joined by seven other co-sponsors, including Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.; Orrin Hatch, R-Utah; Mike Lee, R-Utah; Rand Paul, R-Ky.; James Risch, R-Idaho; Pat Toomey, R-Pa.; and David Vitter, R-La.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
It's a great question to which I don't have an answer. It made me think, however: why would restrictions be improper if the original granting of special rights to the union was constitutional?
I think the ending of forced unionization home child care workers in Michigan provides an interesting precedent.
A neutral question is how in the blazes under the U.S. Constitution can a person be compelled to join a private organization he doesn’t want to join and contribute to a political organization and causes he doesn’t support.
Compulsory unionism is a usurpation of quasi-governmental power by the unions. It is intrinsically wrong and always has been. Just because a corrupt arrangement has been institutionalized doesn’t mean it’s ok.
100% Doc.... You just described me to a “T”
regards,
crosdaddy
No, this is a war for our country. We are losing. We can’t continue to lose because of tactics we refuse to employ. The enemy has no such problem. Win at any cost? Just about, yes.
“Yes Johnny, we live in a socialist totalitarian country now, but we fought fair.
Make the dims defend NATIONALLY the concept that someone must join a union to take a job.
Less then 1/2 the dim caucus can do this, splitting them on the issue...or forcing them to defend the unions against the will of the American people.
Perfect wedge issue.
This is number one needed in my book also.
It is VERY VERY VERY VERY scary when, even here on FR for Pete’s sake, people do not recognize unions as gov’t sanctioned theft of private property for the purpose of buying votes. I EXPECT that kind of ignorance elsewhere, BUT HERE ON FR??????????????????????
Not so neutral. Why wouldn’t it be?
A neutral question - is this a proper use of federal authority?
That was my first thought. Isn’t this just strengthening the power on centralized government? This should be left to the states, it would seem to me.
Uh, maybe the 10th Amendment?
Private unions are just as bad. They keep excellent employees from being promoted because of the seniority of horrible, lazy *ss employees.. Companies (like electrical) aren’t allowed to select the employees they want, they have to take the next employee by seniority in the union or both the company and employee will suffer the wrath of hell.
I know of one company right now that has more work than they can do and because of the union practices of the above can’t get qualified employees to do the extra work they would like to do. so, the work is backed up and the union thugs just sit and wait for the NEXT IN LINE sorry excuse for an electrician. No company with an ounce of integrity is going to hire an employee who doesn’t care if they do a good job (which is what is left of the UNION THUGS available).
And this is a right to work state.
It is a precedent at the state level, NOT the federal level.
I am all for states doing what happened in Wisconsin. That follows the Constitution.
I suspect what is being proposed at the federal level is unconstitutional.
To start out with, union violence and sabotage in furtherance of their goals should be treated exactly the same as would a business which engaged in violence against competitors.
Don’t worry, Boehner will tie it up, as he has for years....Demwits need do nothing.
What is alarming is that we laymen refer to the constitution, while those “heroes” on “our side” seem to be either ignorant of it, or don’t even care about it.
We live in dangerous times.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.