Yellow | Teamsters Say No To Right-To-Work (For Less)!

[Pup Driver]

No different than we the Taxpayers are paying for the support of the 47% of Americans that don't pay Federal Income taxes....

So it sounds as if your saying that the workers that stop paying due's but still get full benefits from the union aren't any better than the so called 47 % , Yeah , hell I'll drink to that thats a good comparison Jimmy good job .

 

[bigtruk_us]

I'm not a constitutional expert.So those that made that statement are right.What I am sure of.Is all State houses in this Union.Have rules to follow.When changing anything involving that state's people or citizenry.There is a process called Due Process.Whereby issues involving the people of that particular state.Must first get a generalized consensus from the voters of that state.By having general referendum on the ballot.This process is necessary.Because otherwise.These State houses would be ruling as if that state is a banana republic.That the people's rights would be rendered null and void.I call it a dictatorship.Which is totally wrong.How about if these very law makers took something.that was near and dear to your heart.And all that you could do as a citizen.Is sit at home and watch and listen to them snatch it from youNow multiply that to the other people.who have the same thing near and dear to their hearts.See that doesn't feel very well.Whether it concerns labor law or any other law.It just looked to me.that Lansing just stole the rights of the people.What else will they take?In my opinion.This is wrong and that this action by Lansing.Should be struck down and reapproached at a later date

 

[bigtruk_us]

It also seems to me.That all the unions in general are under attack.I feel this isn't warranted.Because in my opinion.The recession and the jobless rate has exposed some of these States leadership for what they are.Mostly incompetent and not necessarily all that great of leaders.Lets add thievery to the mix.Some of these states have squandered a ton of money on unnecessary things or items.Bridge to no where.Additions to airports.These states negotiated contracts with these bargaining units of Unions.They are bound to these agreements.unless both parties agree on modifications.

 

[wolf]

Anyone can be. All you have to do is read it.
And I didn't say it was constitutional or not, now did I?

So as usual you don't have a clue either.

 

[Stoney]

So as usual you don't have a clue either.

As usual? Another insulr based on ignorance.

Go back and read what I wrote. Your trying to get a lame gotcha moment becuase your dislike of me.

 

[wolf]

As usual? Another insulr based on ignorance.

Go back and read what I wrote. Your trying to get a lame gotcha moment becuase your dislike of me.

:ShakeHandsNah:

 

[Joe the plumber]

Once again I will ask you .Are you for unions or are you against?? can't have it both ways..

I say again..this is America. Everyone is on their own. Jimmy Hoffa is good for the teamster union but he's bad for America. He and Obama are loons. It's just that I don't any union who bargains with Democrats because I don't like Democrats..Of course we're speak of public unions here

hes a troll maskerading as a union guy pay no attention to the man behind the curtain

go read a paper will ya? See what's going on in da world of politics tho you still may not get it

 

[jimmy g]

I'm not a constitutional expert.So those that made that statement are right.What I am sure of.Is all State houses in this Union.Have rules to follow.When changing anything involving that state's people or citizenry.There is a process called Due Process.Whereby issues involving the people of that particular state.Must first get a generalized consensus from the voters of that state.By having general referendum on the ballot.This process is necessary.Because otherwise.These State houses would be ruling as if that state is a banana republic.That the people's rights would be rendered null and void.I call it a dictatorship.Which is totally wrong.How about if these very law makers took something.that was near and dear to your heart.And all that you could do as a citizen.Is sit at home and watch and listen to them snatch it from youNow multiply that to the other people.who have the same thing near and dear to their hearts.See that doesn't feel very well.Whether it concerns labor law or any other law.It just looked to me.that Lansing just stole the rights of the people.What else will they take?In my opinion.This is wrong and that this action by Lansing.Should be struck down and reapproached at a later date

The Supreme Court has ruled in precedent that Due Process must be limited. We already elect Representatives to enact laws for us. For Due Process to be called on every law that comes from a legislature, there would be Zero Laws (Which wouldn't bother me at all). Obamacare went forward with no Due Process, for example. More than 2/3rds of Americans both opposed it, and stand to lose property. money, and lifestyle (and possibly their very life!) because of it; yet it was passed anyway....In the 1950s union membership was approx 45% of Americans. Now, it's approx 10%, and falling..... It's become passe/ a Special Interest Group....


Due Process Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Civil due process
At a basic level, procedural due process is essentially based on the concept of "fundamental fairness." For example, in 1934, the United States Supreme Court held that due process is violated "if a practice or rule offends some principle of justice so rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people as to be ranked as fundamental."[11] As construed by the courts, it includes an individual's right to be adequately notified of charges or proceedings, the opportunity to be heard at these proceedings, and that the person or panel making the final decision over the proceedings be impartial in regards to the matter before them.[12]
Or, to put it more simply, where an individual is facing a deprivation of life, liberty, or property, procedural due process mandates that he or she is entitled to adequate notice, a hearing, and a neutral judge.
The Supreme Court has formulated a balancing test to determine the rigor with which the requirements of procedural due process should be applied to a particular deprivation, for the obvious reason that mandating such requirements in the most expansive way for even the most minor deprivations would bring the machinery of government to a halt. The Court set out the test as follows: "dentification of the specific dictates of due process generally requires consideration of three distinct factors: first, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and, finally, the Government's interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail."[13]
Procedural due process has also been an important factor in the development of the law of personal jurisdiction, in the sense that it is inherently unfair for the judicial machinery of a state to take away the property of a person who has no connection to it whatsoever. A significant portion of U.S. constitutional law is therefore directed to what kinds of connections to a state are enough for that state's assertion of jurisdiction over a nonresident to comport with procedural due process.

 

[wolf]

That's some heavy reading there Jimmy....All I know is I did not like the way they did it and I'm taking Names.

 

[Stoney]

That's some heavy reading there Jimmy....All I know is I did not like the way they did it and I'm taking Names.

Now that's a fair point.

 

[bigtruk_us]

There is someone behind all these attacks.Against unions,the gay issue and others.This person or persons is dead set against the democrats.A conflict of some sort.its not the people at large its an individual that is powerful.I heard about it on the radio a few times this week.An internal war per se

 

[bigtruk_us]

Also I read in that Wikipedia piece.Defining fundamental fairness.Common sense and fundamental fairness is just what didnt happen in that Lansing state house.Thats why alot of people are upset..Its not all about union this or union that.It was the will of the people that was challenged by a select few.

 

[Dracula]

The Dippy people that vote for right to work don't even know what it means, alot of union members don't know what right to work means, people voting on it don't even know what a union is some of them, they are sheep, doing what they are told to do.

Right to work is nothing more than giving workers the freedom to work in a union shop without joining.

I hate it, I think it smells like ass, but thats what these sniveling rich cock suckers want, so here we go.

Funny thing is our union has to represent these guys that don't pay dues here at Sysco, however they don't do much for them, they pretty much let them get fired, or ignore the problem they have, seems these suck asses that don't want to belong to our local sure do seem to want them when they get into a ****storm of trouble, problem is the local turnes a blind eye, as they should. I tell guys all the time, "you aren't fireproof, you need to join, someday you may need our local, and if you do all the dues will be worth it", most don't listen, I got no sympathy.

Just read Grocerythrower vomiting hate like he just got food poisoning and you can understand why people are turning away from unions. What a poster child for the GOP.

 

[Dracula]

Big truck, I don't know how you can be any fairer. Snyder and everyone in the legislature were elected by the people of Michigan. The people of Michigan spoke and elected Snyder with 53% of the vote and Snyder's position on RTW was known before the election. The democrats had their chance at the ballot box and they lost. Elections do have consequences.

 

[okeydokey]

According to the papers, Voters in Michigan turned down proposal 2 at election time which would of made right to work law unconstitutional and it failed. So what does that tell you. you only have about 10,000 people show up in protest. if issue was that much of important to the people in the state would think a whole lot more would of showed up. Yes this does give the unions a blow . However like Stoney stated if the unions are able to sell their services then nothing to worry about. The unions will rise again down the road as we all have seen in some sort of fashion that history will repeat itself

 

[wolf]

Big truck, I don't know how you can be any fairer. Snyder and everyone in the legislature were elected by the people of Michigan. The people of Michigan spoke and elected Snyder with 53% of the vote and Snyder's position on RTW was known before the election. The democrats had their chance at the ballot box and they lost. Elections do have consequences.

You better check that, Snyder has said from day 1 he was not interested in RTW....intil last week. We knew and still elected is hogwash.....Much has happened to open Eyes on Snyder beyond RTW, I for one expect things to be way different come Nov 2014 but who knows.

 

[Stoney]

You better check that, Snyder has said from day 1 he was not interested in RTW....intil last week. We knew and still elected is hogwash.....Much has happened to open Eyes on Snyder beyond RTW, I for one expect things to be way different come Nov 2014 but who knows.

Not exactly. He said he would sign it if the bill had the will of the people.

 

[wolf]

Not exactly. He said he would sign it if the bill had the will of the people.

Really? I don't recall that interview. I have been hearing different since the Wisconsin battle. I never listen to the same Radio as you so I will not say you lie. But I am used to how you twist things to try and prove you know something.


Last Thursday, Michigan's GOP-led legislature passed bills to make Michigan the 24th state with right-to-work laws on the books. The move came as something of a surprise, in part because Snyder, the governor, has long maintained that right-to-work was not on his agenda. The first-term governor, who has until now largely been viewed as a moderate, said Thursday he plans to sign the measure despite it being a "divisive issue."

The big union fight in Michigan explained - CBS News

 

[Shilka]

"Funny thing is our union has to represent these guys that don't pay dues here at Sysco, however they don't do much for them, they pretty much let them get fired, or ignore the problem they have,"
As a past business agent level rep in a RTW environment you have a fine line to walk here as the "victim" .. lol .. ****! could press charges with Dept of Labor for misrepresentation if your actions are blatant. That point aside it still is easy to let them sink and I have.

 

[Joe the plumber]

Seriously? You believe that....?

I believe that. Here you have a state like Michigan who is broke and losing industry and people because of the high/tax no/work situation. You could understand union people getting crazy over it but why would democrats be so suicidal over it? Because the funding they will lose when the folks chose either to not pay the dues or chose not to be in da union