Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Your position here is like a RTW person arguing they want to do it for the employees benefit. Paying a Union due is a mandatory hardship placed on the employee. If it wasn't a hardship you wouldn't be opposed to RTW legislation as Union membership would only be positive and no one would ever choose not to join.
|
Wouldn’t that employee be able to avoid suffering that hardship by applying for a job where they would not have to pay union dues? If they feel so strongly about getting rid of the dues they can push for decertification, it’s not as if they have no options.
Quote:
|
So is disingenuous to say that the new employee has a choice. They do not. Where you work is not a choice for many people.
|
How are they forced to take the job? Aside from prisoners, no one is forced to work anywhere regardless of their situation. A person’s only options may be to have to choose between a union job or unemployment, but it is still a choice. The same as choosing between a union job and a minimum wage job.
Quote:
|
It is a neccessary hardship to realize the benefits of unionization but don't pretend that an x% fee on wages isn't a hardship.
|
When the sum of the increase in compensation after unionizing is greater than the amount paid in union dues which contributed to getting that increase I find it hard to agree with it being labelled a hardship.