Union Posts Names of Non-Members, Urges Shunning

Capitol Confidential ^ | 1/9/2016 | Tom Gantert

[RoadGumby]

my contract to work is between my employer and myself, unions can go pound sand.

Unions are blatantly socialist and Dem/Comm supporting. They can go pound sand.

[sauropod]

Shun the Union. Publically.

[SeeSharp]

So then if the workers choose to exercise their right not to join the Union then anything the Union negotiates as part of their contract - salaries, profit sharing, etc. - doesn’t have to be paid to the non-member workers, right?

Wrong. The Wagner Act requires that every employee who holds a job that is classified under a union contract to be subject to the terms of the union contract whether they are union members or not. It also forbids having more than one union represent a particular job class. "Right to work" laws only get you out of having to be in the union in order to get a job. RTW's don't give workers the right to bargain for their wages and benefits.

[SampleMan]

I would send an anonymous letter to the union leadership letting them know that whatever happens to a non-union member or their family will be happening to them and their family...in spades.

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

Went to work in a machine shop in Milwaukee. Had to join Machinists an Aerospace. Okay. But I produced too many parts on my first day. Union stew said I could only make 800, and I had made 1,100. Next day I made 1,300, and they were waiting for me in the parking lot.

[Sergio]

Have the libs passed any anti-bullying laws in the state that can be used against the union? Seems to me like the non-union employees are being bullied by the union. The idea of using liberal laws against liberal organizations has always held appeal for me.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

If the UAW is willing to sacrifice safety for their own profit then workers may need to do more than just opt out, they may need a new union.

At a unionized plant that I worked at the Union prevented the installation of safety equipment for over two years because it would reduce the number of union workers in that area by three.

They would only approve it after one worker retired and two quit.

In that time there were a number of injuries in that area, several which were serious.

They valued the union dues of those three paycheck more then they valued union members without crush injuries to their extremities.

After the equipment was installed they came out and stated they had "pressured management into installing the safety equipment. Another way we fight for you!"

And people wonder why I have a bad opinion of unions.

[headstamp 2]

Sounds like a lawsuit is in their future EEOC style. Creating a hostile work environment.

[terycarl]

I would have volunteered to put my name on the top of the list....I petitioned my union to refund any portion of my dues that had been used for political purposes.....they did.

[terycarl]

Went to work in a machine shop in Milwaukee. Had to join Machinists an Aerospace. Okay. But I produced too many parts on my first day. Union stew said I could only make 800, and I had made 1,100. Next day I made 1,300, and they were waiting for me in the parking lot.

I faced almost the exact thing in a plastic injection molding company in Pewaukee many moons ago....I was a teenaged punk and advised them STRONGLY not to fool with me......they didn't.

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

Well, In my case there were 8 of them around my car. My best friend had gotten his Dad to give me a job, and I wanted to prove to Hans that I’d do my best for him. When I told him what I was dealing with, he got me a job at a non-union shop. He was pissed!

[Secret Agent Man]

If they are not part of the union they have no fair share to pay for. Unions admit they often use bargaining tactics that are more negative for non-union workers.

What bs.

[Secret Agent Man]

Yes that would be a good angle for manageent to take, as it’s not a place to be pissy little kids at, it is called WORK and if you deliberately do not work with others, you are gone.