It’s about power—social, political and economic power.
About AFLCIO power!
Socialist power!
Haha…but the feeling that you aren’t having part of your pay check confiscated and sent to some union goons and fat slobs with Mafia ties: priceless.
Actually, it’s about not being forced to financially support something you disagree with completely.
You do not have a right to work. It is a privilege to get a job here in the US. The only right you have is what you brought into this world: life. And that can be taken away if you decide to do things to forfeit it. There are no other rights. The left wants to make everything a right. It isn’t.
rwood
Say the union goons who will break your legs if you go against them.
Why do we have Communist propaganda here?
Union shops are a cynical power grab, about power—social, political and economic power.
Other than the heading of “know thy enemy” why are we regularly treated to these union press releases? Their takes are highly predictable and uniformly anti-conservative. Why waste JimRob’s bandwidth?
I met Trumka once in Detroit. Every word regarding right to work laws was a lie.
I had to go to my hotel room and take a shower.
(circa 2000).
5.56mm
.
AFL-CIO crime syndicate?
.
the ACLU-CIO needs to get out of our government, city and county buildings.
You gotta understand, the AFL-CIO isn’t “about power—social, political and economic power.”
Or so they’d have you believe.
http://www.peoplesworld.org/article/after-64-years-still-paying-the-price-for-taft-hartley/
“required that all union officials pledge that they were not communists. (This part of the law was ruled unconstitutional in 1965.)”
Those were the days, now communist party membership (Democrat) is mandatory.
Pretty much textbook for the Left to accuse its opponents of what they themselves are doing.
Unions suck. The uato workers (UAW) couldn’t get the Chattanooga VW plant vote to go their way with 4 or 5 votes.
Union finally (with Obama’s LRB) manages to sneak in a small UAW sub group. Crazy. Google/bing/DuckDuckGo it.
Down South men feel confident to do a good job, get honest pay, individually negotiate based on performance, but UAW wants to come in and protect druggies, incompetence, diversity, labor categories.... that have proven to kill everyone’s job. Pathetic.
German car companies are used to negotiating with unions that care about the long term and employees but that ain’t the UAW. Crazy world where the workers have to protect themselves and the company against the unions.
Don’t forget the UAW will spend the union dues supporting politics their members don’t agree with. Just ask the coal miner union members about the millions spent supporting “global warming” and green house gas emissions reductions buy gutting their own members jobs. It’s crazy. Teachers unions supporting Abortion ....
Arise, you prisoners of starvation!
Patriots are reminded that the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect labor unions.
In fact, the NLRB doesn’t have any constitutional justification to exist imo, arguably a product of post-17th Amendment ratification lawmakers willing to make unconstitutional promises to low-information voters to get elected, but also consider the following.
Regardless what FDR’s state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices wanted everybody to believe about the scope of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3) when they wrongly decided Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824 in Congress’s favor imo, please consider this.
FDR’s activist justices wrongly ignored that a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds the specific power to regulate INTRAstate commerce.
"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added]." -Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
On the other hand, note that a given state can make laws supporting unions, as long as such laws don’t abridge the constitutionally enumerated rights of citizens, such action prohibited by Section 1 of the 14th Amendment.
"14th Amendment, Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
"14th Amendment, Section 5: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."
Corrections, insights welcome.