Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]
| Welcome to Our Hoosier Board! Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions. Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful. Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine! Cheers, sirbrianwilson Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Right to Work; let's discuss it again | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 19 2012, 12:19 PM (194 Views) | |
| Mr Gray | Jan 19 2012, 12:19 PM Post #1 |
![]()
Coach
|
OK, obviously this is a big issue again in Indiana, and might force another Democrat walk out. I have been trying desperately to get clarity on the current law, and the impact of the right to work legislation regarding the Union's responsibility or obligation to represent non-union employees. My stance is very clear at this point. I don't think any individual should be forced, by law, to join a union in order to secure employment at any business, private or public. I don't think that any union should be forced, by law, to represent any employee who voluntarily opted out of union membership. Both sides are being so clearly disingenuous right now, it's laughable and sickening at the same time. If the Unions are going to be forced to represent employees without receiving dues, clearly that is a union-busting measure, and the GOP needs to admit to such. The Unions, by forcing people to join and pay dues by law, is clearly a brilliant fundraising tactic for the Democrats whereby they effectively get campaign contributions from individual citizens regardless of whether or not they support the Democratic party, and the Dems should equally admit to this. It seems to me that neither side is interested in fairness, rather they want the law to benefit them and their political party, meanwhile the skirt the heart of this matter by simply parading out a long line of manipulated and anecdotal "data" claiming that their respective efforts will be better for the state as a whole....neither of which is actually true, nor should it matter. What's right is right, and freedom should be the objective, not individual or party gain. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Jan 19 2012, 05:02 PM Post #2 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
Republicans in Indiana are claiming that their surveys have shown that Hoosiers want right to work. Democrats have claimed the opposite and have asked for a referendum on the issue. Republicans have claimed that it is Indiana law to have a binding referendum to do so...which is kind of smokescreen, because if a non-binding referendum were to take place and the public voted for it, then the republican held house and senate has enough votes to pass it AND very easily state that they are doing so with the will of the people. What would the public vote on a referendum? I don't know. I know that the percentage of people actually in organized unions in Indiana is relatively small...and we have partisan polls on both sides stating opposing things. IMO, it's an issue that lends itself perfectly to a state referendum. |
| |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Jan 19 2012, 05:05 PM Post #3 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
BTW, I would also like to say that just because someone is in a union in Indiana does mean that they currently work in conditions where union dues and membership are mandatory. I can tell you that it is not the case in education...I think if you go from corporation to corporation, you'll find some with as much as 40% of their members not in unions. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Jan 19 2012, 09:45 PM Post #4 |
![]()
Coach
|
I believe the reasoning for that is because you are a public sector union, but I'm not 100% on that...this is an issue that is very difficult to research, because every source is seemingly biased one way or another. I wouldn't recommend a referendum though, because the Unions have the money to play more of the dishonest ads that they have already been playing, which will sway the majority of the public who really doesn't give a shit either way, and do not understand the issue to begin with. There really isn't an organization for non-unions to raise the necessary funds to counter attack. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Jan 19 2012, 10:19 PM Post #5 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
Yeah, Americans for Prosperity or their like never run anti-union ads. [utube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adX6C01X9TU[/utube]
[utube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxVe5wF8ob4[/utube] [utube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umXIFPIU25s[/utube] [utube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HzAz3j1z6A[/utube] |
| |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Jan 20 2012, 11:04 AM Post #6 |
![]()
Coach
|
I have seen and heard ads from the pro-right to work side, but I don't think they have enough $ to equal the Union's campaign. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Jan 20 2012, 04:11 PM Post #7 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
So the ability to have referendums should be dependent not on the importance of the issue but rather on how much advertising money is available? Really? Secondly, referendums for right to work passed in Oklahoma and Idaho.....so how could that be if it based on advertising money? It passed in Ohio, but the polling numbers on it before it ever had become a possibility to be a referendum were in total balance with what the final results were. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Jan 20 2012, 08:21 PM Post #8 |
![]()
Coach
|
I don't really know why referendums exist to begin with...this is a Republic, but yes a HUGE factor in deciding if something should go to referendum should be how much money each side has to promote their view, because there is no real standard for truth in advertising, and the public can basically be duped simply because one side had enough money to do it. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Jan 21 2012, 01:21 AM Post #9 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
:facepalm: Let's get rid of everything that is influenced by money then....wouldn't want to 'dupe' the public. No political advertising during elections because the side with more money can dupe the public more. No advertising for products because the big companies can afford more commercials giving them an unfair advantage. I find it very strange that you have no problem with the duping practices that predatory credit card companies use but when it comes to political advertising, you have an issue. I guess buyer beware only counts when it profits a company. |
| |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Jan 21 2012, 01:24 AM Post #10 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
Also noticed that you completely sidestepped the issue that referendums on right to work passed in two of the three states that I've found that had a referendum, and in every case the polls on the issue prior to any advertising was no different than the final result. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Jan 21 2012, 12:55 PM Post #11 |
![]()
Coach
|
credit card companies can't force anything on me by law. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Jan 21 2012, 12:56 PM Post #12 |
![]()
Coach
|
not sidestepping it...I just don't care. Just because it was done in other states doesn't mean it should be done here, nor does it mean I should like it. Let's see a link to your data that advertising didn't influence the results. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Jan 21 2012, 01:06 PM Post #13 |
![]()
Coach
|
Additionally, let's go back to the core subject here...the actual legislation. If the Union is as great as it claims to be, why can't it stand on it's own....why does it need to force people to join it by law? |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Jan 21 2012, 04:52 PM Post #14 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
I have no problem with people not being forced to join so long as they do not reap the benefits that the union produces. If not being in a union is so great, then why do so many in situations where union membership is not mandatory join? |
| |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Jan 21 2012, 04:55 PM Post #15 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
Neither can a referendum on right to work. Nobody says you have to work for a unioned business. If you don't like it, work elsewhere. |
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
7:51 PM Jul 10
|









7:51 PM Jul 10