Report Inappropriate Comments

unionthug--why don't you send me a private msg on FB. reveal yourself. then have a meeting with us face to face-- I will keep it confidential. I understand all of this factual information is hard to take and its hard to swallow that you have been deceived for many years. But at least open your mind to how what myself, and many others are doing. You really need to understand that I have nothing against unions, my issues are the corruption occurring within unions, the workers who take advantage of the system is also an issue for me. The fact that we don't have leadership that does not tolerate it either is another problem. There are many good city workers, it's the ones that are bad and dishonest that sets a very bad precedent in the overall minds of the general public. Thats what I really wish you'd understand. If your immediate response is to deny and deflect, then Im thinking its on purpose and intentional and part of your agenda. Do you have anything to hide? Because let me assure you, thats how its coming across. People who have nothing to hide are interested in doing the right thing. We know who is not doing this. So for me that means much is being covered up. And let me assure you, I will not stop until it is all exposed. Ive had many confidential conversations with city workers who asked I keep their identity anonymous and they are DISGUSTED with what is happening behind the scenes. They have face-to=face shared with me that they are afraid to speak up for fear of retaliation and retribution. Read your contracts---that's actually illegal and if any city worker is being harassed or bullied because they speak up about something, you actually have a very good law suit in your hands. I'd also contact the RI ACLU. So carry on union thug--I truly hope workers with a closed mentality like you are not the majority , because if so, it would clearly justify why things are so bad and why you've been taken advantage of for so long. Happy New Year!!! and it will be....

Union Thug---here--- for you to re-read because I don't think you actually have. This information actually benefits you, and do you really enjoy paying those union dues? I doubt it.

Myth: Right-to-work laws prohibit unions.

1. Myth: Right-to-work laws prohibit unions.Fact: Right-to-work laws make union dues voluntary. Without right-to-work laws, unions negotiate contracts that force workers to pay dues or get fired. Right-to-work laws protect workers’ freedom. The National Labor Relations Act also protects the right of workers in right-to-work states to unionize. Unions currently represent 4.4 million workers in 24 right-to-work states, including highly unionized Nevada, Iowa and Michigan.

Myth: Right-to-work laws undermine unions.

Fact: Right-to-work laws make unions work to earn workers’ support. In the long run, this can strengthen union locals. Without right-to-work laws, unions can take their members’ dues for granted and provide lower quality representation. Gary Casteel, the Southern region director for the United Auto Workers, explains:

“This is something I’ve never understood – that people think right to work hurts unions. To me, it helps them. You don’t have to belong if you don’t want to. So if I go to an organizing drive, I can tell these workers, ‘If you don’t like this arrangement, you don’t have to belong.’ Versus, ‘If we get 50 percent of you, then all of you have to belong, whether you like to or not.’ I don’t even like the way that sounds, because it’s a voluntary system, and if you don’t think the system’s earning its keep, then you don’t have to pay.”

2. Myth: Right-to-work laws allow nonunion members to “free ride” on the benefits of union representation without paying its cost.

Fact: Unions voluntarily represent non-members. The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that the National Labor Relations Act allows unions to negotiate contracts covering only dues-paying members. As Justice Brennan wrote in Retail Clerks v. Dry Lion Goods (1962), “Members only’ contracts have long been recognized.” Unions represent non-members only when they act as “exclusive bargaining representatives,” which requires non-members to accept the union’s representation.

In that case, the law requires unions to represent non-members fairly. They cannot negotiate high wages for their supporters and the minimum wage for non-members. Unions can avoid representing non-members by disclaiming exclusive representative status.

3. Myth: Representing non-members costs exclusive representative unions a lot of money.

Fact: Unions often spend little on representational activities. When unions choose to act as exclusive bargaining representatives, they often spend relatively little on processing grievances and negotiating contracts. Often union contracts have employers cover these costs by allowing union stewards to do union business while on company time. As a result, many union locals spend very little representing workers – either members or non-members.

Federal filings reveal that in 2013 United Auto Workers Local 2164 in Bowling Green, Kentucky, spent just 2 percent of its $560,000 budget on representational activities. Boilermakers Local 107 in Brookfield, Wisconsin, spent 5 percent of its $2.0 million budget on representational activities. Machinists Lodge 2515 in Alamogordo, N.M., spent 23 percent of its $645,000 budget on representational activities, almost all of which constituted payments to its officers.

4. Myth: Right-to-work laws lower wages.

Fact: Workers have the same or higher buying power in right-to-work states. Opponents often deride voluntary dues as “right-to-work for less.” Average wages in right-to-work states are indeed slightly lower than in non-right-to-work states. This occurs because almost every Southern state has a right-to-work law, and the South has a lower cost of living. Studies that control for differences in costs of living find workers in states with voluntary dues have no lower – and possibly slightly higher – real wages than workers in states with compulsory dues.