Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eoj
Ok, thanks for clarifying, it certainly seems that your statement indicated that a miscommunication due to language was an acceptable way for unions to coerce employees into signing cards. It's really sad to see this Union get away with both this and the bullying; glad you agree.
|
Sorry for the confusion. What I was saying is that
if the former member signing the card simply misinterpreted the explanation about their dues being in arrears then it would not be coercion. If they were actually told that they owed money that they didn’t in an effort to get them to sign a card then that would obviously be completely unacceptable.
Edit: when you say it’s really sad to see the union get away with this, you’re assuming they’re guilty and also making the assumption that if they have done something wrong they will be getting away with it. Looking back in this thread you’ve actually made assumptions or accusations based on assumptions in every single post you’ve made. Just thought I’d point that out.