Archive for Saturday, September 27, 2008
Our View: Unions should be a choice
September 27, 2008
Craig Editorial Board
- Bryce Jacobson, newspaper representative
- Jennifer L. Grubbs, newspaper representative
- Bridget Manley, newspaper representative
- Allan Reishus, community representative
- Chris Runyan, community representative
- Ken Wergin, community representative
Craig — There is no getting around the fact that the proposed "right to work" amendment - Amendment 47 - on the Nov. 4 ballot will weaken unions.
But that is not our problem.
No person should ever be forced to join a group or organization under any circumstances. No person should ever be forced to pay a group or organization under any circumstances.
That unions have this authority is not right, and as such, this is a case where we do not care if unions are weakened by this amendment.
It is just what is right.
The measure will not destroy unions. It merely will make them more responsible to their members, harkening back to why they were created in the first place.
Instead of having the security of forced membership or forced wage dues, unions will have to earn worker participation.
We do not see anything wrong with that.
We are, however, concerned about voting for yet another amendment to the Colorado Constitution.
It seems every time Coloradans do this, it screws something up and we have to spend another year or two living within a broken system before going back to the voting booth for a fix.
Unfortunately, a constitutional amendment is the only way. We do not want legislators voting on this, because it is too big for them to decide. We want the people to decide for themselves.
We do not hate unions, nor do we want them dismantled. We simply believe membership should be a free choice.
If it were not for unions, there would not be a blue-collar middle class, and upward mobility would be limited in our society. Businesses can be trusted to do what is best for them, not their workers.
Unfortunately, the same can be said for modern union leaders.
We think both should be checked by the same principle: We may decide to work for your business or join your organization, or we may decide your business or organization are a waste of time and move on.
Advertisement
Advertisement
27 September 2008
at 2:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
taxslave (Anonymous) says…
Beware, this initative takes away the secret ballot. I advise everyone to read the legislation, the devil is in the details, like always.
27 September 2008
at 7:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
martin (Anonymous) says…
you cannot be forced to join a union! you can't be forced to pay dues!
It's been illegal since 1935 when this country passed the National Labor Relations Act.
Based on your premise that everyone should have a choice, you should vote down amendment 47 because Colorado's workers already have that choice.
amendment 47 would take choice away from workers and employers.
I think you should issue a correction to this editorial, it's not factually correct.
27 September 2008
at 8:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
dentedfender (Anonymous) says…
In Colorado, after workers vote to join a union (by a simple majority), they can sit across the bargaining table from their employer and negotiate everything from wages to health care to hours to working conditions.
But even after the workers elect to join a union, Colorado law forbids the workers and their union to begin negotiations over one item-a union security clause. A union security clause doesn't force anyone to join the union, it simply requires that all workers, member or non-member, pay representational costs.
Colorado is the only state in the nation that limits bargaining in this way. If the workers and their union even want to bring the issue up with the employer, they must first hold another election, and in this second election-the majority doesn't rule. Colorado law requires that 75 percent of those voting or a majority of all those eligible to vote-not just a majority of those who cast ballots-must approve of putting a union security clause on the bargaining table.
27 September 2008
at 8:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
dentedfender (Anonymous) says…
taxslave, I have read the entire admendment several times and see nowhere that says it will take away my right to privacy or secret ballot. Quit watching commercials and do your own research and make an informed choice. In fact the amendment is only a little over a page long so it doesn't take much reading.
27 September 2008
at 9:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Patrick (Anonymous) says…
If this federal labor law exists I need to know it! The unions are about to be broken. If they can take a pass on 47, then the actual union busting amendments look alot different. If everyone is there of their complete free will the public will rally for the unions on last two. The last two depend on how you feel about your place in the union. Is it volentary, or is it because you have little choice. If people are free to join the union, then of course they would want the “no effort and no cost” privlage of money being taken out of there check for dues, the same with their unions political donations.
47 is the squew the rest will be judged from. A union has assured me that their going to counter point my article. Let's hope to God they bring this out well. I believe in 47, not 49 and the other one. The unions have got to step up with their side if they hope to stand a chance. If they don't Colorado will have the same wages as China.
27 September 2008
at 10:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
taxslave (Anonymous) says…
btw, I don't watch any MSM other than to hear the lies they tell everyone.
I read at least 6 hrs./day overseas papers, legislation, etc. I also watch the House and the Senate and most of the hearings….live.
I watched the 9 hrs. of the financial hearings….talk about the taxpayer getting screwed and this country giving away her Constitution.
I sometimes wonder where our military is on this….Remember, against foreign and domestic.
We are facing financial terrorism brought to us by everyone in Washington….all of them are guilty….except Ron Paul
Bernake and Paulson need to be criminally charged…..
This week alone we've bailed out the “financial” banks with over 1 and 1/2 trillion dollars…this week.
The South East is totally out of gas….and they can't get to work.
This 700 billion will last less than a month.
A government than can give you everything you want is a government that can take away everything you have.
WAKE UP.
27 September 2008
at 11:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
grannyrett (Anonymous) says…
Sorry taxslave, I've got family in the southeast, and they aren't having a problem getting gas. Don't know where you got that.
27 September 2008
at 1:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
taxslave (Anonymous) says…
pictures of bailout protest on wall street
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/10…
Atlanta and Savannah Georgia are out of gas.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Wash…
The masses are clueless….We are also facing a massive food shortage…..you would know this if you watched the House of Representatives today. They also cut funding for deputy sheriffs and teachers in the rural areas……that means us!
I truly wished I was making this stuff up.
27 September 2008
at 2:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
lonelyone (Anonymous) says…
Tax, what does that have to do with Unions? I am pretty sure you belonged to one at one time. Tell us how you feel about them.
Also I am having a hard time understanding why our local unoin reps are not posting something to explain to Patrick the union side of the story??? Where are the reps from IBEW and United Mine Workers and Safeways union and any others that are out there? Do you all not care what people who will vote on this stuff even if they don't belong to a union, think of all the ads out there against unions???
27 September 2008
at 6:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
grannyrett (Anonymous) says…
Sorry taxslave-I guess Atlanta is having a bad time getting fuel. My niece, who lives south of Atlanta, said they aren't having a bad time getting fuel. Don't know why they are so lucky. Maybe it's better in small towns.
28 September 2008
at 9:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
lonelyone (Anonymous) says…
I heard about the fuel problem yesterday on the radio and it said one guy had to pay over 8 dollars a gallon for gas, so now they are looking into price fixing and some stations could be in big trouble!
29 September 2008
at 7:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
dentedfender (Anonymous) says…
Patrick, you can start out by reading the Wagner Act which was amended by the National Labor Relations Act which was amended by the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947 and has remained in effect to this day
29 September 2008
at 1:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Patrick (Anonymous) says…
Ok, thank you.
29 September 2008
at 2:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Patrick (Anonymous) says…
I believe I found it. It came up under the union security clause. Unions can not present labor contracts that require employers to fire none union members.
Now here is the million dollar question. Where are the unions? Why aren't they explaining this? I hope those editorials start coming out. Instead of people blaming me for supporting something that sounds like good common sense, they need to get out there and present their side.
I still believe in 47, however I should have, and we should have known about this law all along. Where is the PR people for the unions? If this is just a myth, why haven't they educated the people other wise?
29 September 2008
at 4:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
lonelyone (Anonymous) says…
I have heard they are going to wait until about a week or so before election time and then put out a whole bunch of info and commericals. I think that should be going on now as some folks will vote early if they can and will be voting with only one side of the story!
Patrick do you know any union people, could you talk to them and get their side of the story??
29 September 2008
at 4:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cantstandtexans (Anonymous) says…
YEOW!!! Ain't this a hot topic! Just remember…the demise of union representation and union busting has ushered in the demise of the American standard of living. Wages have remained static….mostly….and our buying power greatly diminished!! if shipping union jobs to India, China, etc….would allow the consumer to buy so-called cheap goods, how can employing anyone but Americans be beneficial to you or I even if cheap products would allow American Union factory workers to follow “other” ambitions? Fact again is….the demise of the union American worker and shipping jobs to other countries is the cancer that very well could and eventually will take this country to a “New Third World”. Vote no on 47!! Corporate America has corrupted our society long enough!! Besides…there are high profile corporations that recently have been busted for deliberate acts of trying to bust unions. Some of these high profile executives are facing very long prison time and probably…they will be sent there. for what??!!! More company stock options for “THEIR” retirement??!! These scoundrel's have done enough damage….just take a moment and examine what greed has puked out on the financial world. And these investment bank collapses has just gotten started! Besides…who's behind this Amendment 47 anyways? Who stands to benefit from passage of this Amendment? Workers will take it in the shorts….again!! vote no on 47!
29 September 2008
at 11:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Patrick (Anonymous) says…
Can't Stand, that was right in there to heart. My wife is leaning towards that stance. I mean really, a vote yes would bolster unions. I believe it would be at the cost of freedoms but that's my view. Your view is an honest and informed opinon also. I respect the heck out that. I wish everyone cared enough to get to that point.
I found some more out today. There is a big difference between 47 and federal law. I'm going to try and put it in an article. Tick tock, tick tock, I need more time.