Add new comment

Nobody least of all me thinks non union workers are not good people. But what exactly given the history and purpose of the union movement would a non militant union look like. How is the UAW in your opinion militant. all unions have their militant element. When you are fighting against entrenched attitudes and great wealth, by nature that is a militant movement. You are trying to change the staus quo. It is interesting that the same people demanding that we have smaller government and right to work laws to protect the constitution and peoples rights, are pushing a law which is at it's heart unconstitutional. Especially the effort to eliminate "fair Share" fees. How? Well let me give you an example. A basic common law tenant is payment for services rendered. I can't go to the doctor and demand he treat me then refuse to pay when I have the money to pay him. I can be forced to pay him through various means. And he can refuse to treat me in the future except in a life or death emergency. But what right to work proponents advocate is just that, the union being forced to represent those who will not share the load. If those in favor of right to work are honest about their beliefs, then they should also support the right of the union to refuse to provide services to the non payer. This is fair and right. Any one who would suggest otherwise is being disingenuous. It becomes clear their motives are not protecting peoples right to work free of coercion, they are working to starve out the union. If people are free in the workplace to not join the union,then fine. If they are being disciplined by the employer, then they should not be allowed union representation during that process, Or the union should be able to submit them a bill for services rendered and they be required to pay it. They must be directed to negotiate their own contract and compensation. This is right and this is fair. Furthermore, especially in the VW case, it is the COMPANY who wanted the workers to form a union, so that they could have the sort of highly successful labor management model they use in Germany. One that routinely outproduces American factories. Under our laws in the US they needed to have a union in place to represent the workers. Right to work proponents in this case, through the state, inserted themselves between the two in a blatant violation of the legal concept of free contracts. Basically they said the state had the right to stop VW from entering into a contract that they felt would improve their factory. so I don't know if this sheds any light on the issue, but I hope you will at least considr my remarks.