Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Organized Workers

December 30, 2013

Dear Editor, I often hear conservatives say that labor unions’ time has passed and that they were good once, but are not needed any longer....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(33)

turley

Dec-30-13 11:38 AM

Start with those angry school bus drivers in Bridgeport!!LOL....ZZZzzzzz

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reas11

Dec-30-13 3:23 PM

The UFCW Union pays people to picket at Wal-Mart because of a claim they pay minimum wage. This money comes from union dues paid by members of the union who make minimum wage. Wal-Mart workers would be wise to turn there backs on the union and pocket the monthly dues. Let the union bosses pay for their ivory towers on K Street

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BushCrimeFamily

Dec-30-13 5:35 PM

Republicans hate the working man. Only 2 types of people vote GOP: Millionaires and suckers.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

QuizhatKaddyshack

Dec-30-13 7:29 PM

General statements are always not truthful or accurate. "Only two types of people vote Democrat. Idiots and Communists!". A general statement like that is not truthful or accurate, Mr, BushCrimeFamily. Now the letter. Mr. Lofton's last two sentences reveal his true agenda "Labor unions allow workers to have a say so in their workplace." This is a falsehood. When represented by a Union, one cannot talk directly to your employer about an issue without a union representative present to represent THE UNION's interest not the employees. The Union interests are to be protected above the rights of the worker. "If American workers want a slice of the pie, we must organize the un-organized!" Unions want more members which means more union dues and more political power. My question, if unions are for the "working man"', why don't they represent the workers without collecting any UNION dues? Now that would be benevolent!

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Thoughtful

Dec-30-13 7:38 PM

Mr.Ben, As an individual heavily engaged in corporate world, you may be amazed at the investment in furthering associate education, seminars, value add strength and talent enhancement, and building future growth opportunities for these people at all levels of the organization. I would love to spend a day with you and show you the commitment and dedication that many companies have for their employees.

4 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oluhjnb

Dec-30-13 8:07 PM

Why did Ted Cruz have his mug on TV every hour begging for money to repeal the Affordable Care Act? Doesn't he get a yearly salary of 174K?

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

turley

Dec-30-13 8:41 PM

Oluh is way off topic and out on the third ring of Saturn trying to defend the morons he voted for....typical useful white idiot.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capitalist

Jan-01-14 3:22 PM

Mr Ben, keep up the fight . You seem like a very intelligent person. It is up to us to save the middle class. Thanks for all you do !

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

turley

Jan-02-14 11:34 AM

You know what the out of work Wheeling-Pitt workers and the out of work Ormet workers have in common???.....they were all "organized workers"...just like the title of the letter! Now all they have in common is being abandoned by union leaders and democrats.

2 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

QuizhatKaddyshack

Jan-02-14 12:51 PM

You cannot blame the unions for what happened at Wheeling Pitt or Ormet. The fact that they were organized and had certain work rules may have contributed to those companies downfall, but the biggest issue with a unionized workforce is a companies inability affect change in response to the fast paced changes in the market place. That is where a union can be a hindrance. The "unionites" of the Ohio Valley need to recall all of the lost opportunities for economic growth because of the valley's perceived "union bias".

4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oluhjnb

Jan-03-14 7:59 AM

Turley my comment was an answer to Quiz. What is the difference between a union collecting dues for representation and Ted Cruz solicitation for money from voters?

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

QuizhatKaddyshack

Jan-03-14 5:46 PM

"What is the difference between a union collecting dues for representation and Ted Cruz solicitation for money from voters?"

The difference is, workers have no say in "donating" to the union the dues extracted from their hard earned pay. Second, workers have no say where the union places money derived from union dues into the politicians and what party it goes to. Third, if I don't like what Ted Cruz says or even if I like what he says, I can CHOOSE to donate or CHOOSE not to donate to Ted Cruz. With union dues, the worker has no choice but to pay the dues! That is so simple to understand. Why can't you understand that?

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

benlofton

Jan-03-14 7:34 PM

Under Federal Law union dues cannot be used for political purposes, the money unions use for political campaigns is from a seperate voluntary fund. Workers do have a choice, if the majority of the workforce doesn't want a union, they can vote it out.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Thoughtful

Jan-04-14 8:45 AM

The most successful companies focus on employee development, satisfaction, advancement, engagement, and to promote a joint focus of success for the company and it's employees. Any other approach today will not succeed. In today's world, employees are focused on many issues at work besides salary and wages. work schedules, flex time, child care options, company paid education opportunities, consistent performance feedback, internal seminars and self development , and two large issues, challenge of position and growth and promotion opportunities.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oluhjnb

Jan-04-14 5:49 PM

I understand Quiz makes up facts as needed.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

turley

Jan-05-14 2:38 AM

Again, I am reposting a list of Ohio Valley employers with union organized workforces who are presently hiring. Here it is:

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

QuizhatKaddyshack

Jan-05-14 10:41 AM

The Federal Law states: Under union shop agreements, labor unions must establish strict safeguards and procedures for ensuring that non-members’ dues are not used to support certain political and ideological activities that are outside the scope of normal collective bargaining activities. The “union shop” or “agency shop” agreement essentially provides that employees do not have to join the union, but must support the union in order to retain employment by paying dues to defray the costs of collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievance matters. "

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

QuizhatKaddyshack

Jan-05-14 10:43 AM

The key phase in the law is "non-member" union dues!

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

benlofton

Jan-05-14 2:41 PM

Prior to the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, money from unions' general funds could not be spent politically at all. Because of Citizens United; unions may spend money from the general funds, but the money can't be directly contributed to a federal candidate or a political party. In a number of states including Ohio, money from the general funds can't be contributed to support any candidate for political office. Money from the general funds can be used to buy advertisements (that disclose who paid for it) and for activities such as canvassing and get out the vote activities. Workers in non "RTW" states who choose not to become a member of the union at their workplace are entitled to a refund of their "fair share" fee that was used for political purposes.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oluhjnb

Jan-06-14 6:47 AM

The right wing, showing their usual ignorance, lost again.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

QuizhatKaddyshack

Jan-06-14 9:53 AM

I posted a portion of the Federal Law right out of the text of the Law <cut and paste for the technically challenged> and people disagree with what was posted? I know people have opinions, but when faced with a FACT, how can you disagree with what the LAW states? They are mindless followers of a ideology and agree with anything President Obama says. If President Obama wants to change a law passed by congress, he just issues an imperial edict and changes law by fiat. That sounds like a third world dictator. I know, there will be posts stating that I am a hater of President Obama, a racist, a right winger, yada yada yada... Is your opinion so important to you that you will ignore what has happened to the separation of powers laid out by the Constitution of the United States? When people get into power and feel no restraint to the power they yield, then all of us are in danger. Regardless of political party when a politician violates the Constitution, they need smacked down

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

QuizhatKaddyshack

Jan-06-14 9:54 AM

And President Bush and President Clinton should have been SMACKED DOWN HARD for their Constitutional violations!

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

promo61

Jan-06-14 11:02 AM

pumping air into a corpse produces a corpse Ben.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Thoughtful

Jan-06-14 9:00 PM

I post facts about successful companies not related to politics and I get 4 disagrees. Heaven Help Us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

turley

Jan-07-14 12:28 AM

Thoughtful.....many in this area dont like stories or comments about success. They like the gloom of failure and the convenience of placing blame on everyone but themselves. They are consumed by the "victim" mentality that prevails among obamites.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 33 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web