right2worker Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 (edited) The UAW mission from the top will be to go around and tell it's members in order to get represented by the union they have to continue paying dues. hahah I am not for a "Right to Work" state because it takes power away from the union. However employees that get screwed by the union and get crap representation daily will now be thinking twice about paying dues, and the funny part is, the UAW still has to represent that employee working on the line!. Union leaders better do you're jobs now.. lol Edited December 12, 2012 by right2worker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
right2worker Posted December 12, 2012 Author Share Posted December 12, 2012 Further more I would like to add that the UAW will now be forced to cut out meaningless and wasteful jobs that do not benefit or add value to the product or middle class workforce, they will have to now cut back on Vegas Vacations and un-needed trips to Disney Land while the membership will most likely be asked to pay more and retired workers may also have to pay dues to make up for those that don't. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
right2worker Posted December 12, 2012 Author Share Posted December 12, 2012 (edited) Oh one more thing, imagine 200 people in each plant no longer pay union dues to the UAW, this will wake up the Union a bit and force the UAW to start working harder for the employee and also force them to make themselves visible on the shop floor now. Why should I pay dues if the Union isn't doing anything but going to lunch, smoking dope, drinking and hanging out at the strip club while I'm busting my ass on the Dearborn local 600 door line!. Also all the low level twirps that got taken from these plants like Saline and SRP to the National will all be sent back to the lines!. Hip Hip Hurray!. Edited December 12, 2012 by right2worker 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 The UAW now will create a campaign to go around and tell it's members in order to get represented by the union they have to continue paying dues. Nothing wrong with that. It is the truth. MI RTW does NOT effect ANY EXISTING CONTRACTS ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
right2worker Posted December 12, 2012 Author Share Posted December 12, 2012 (edited) MI RTW does NOT effect ANY EXISTING CONTRACTS ! No but what happens when you have 200 people out of 500 in a plant that no longer wishes to pay dues, they aren't getting proper service to begin with (I'm sure I can speak for many angry workers) so why would they pay? I can't even get a union rep down, I can get any OT grievances written, I can't get issues addressed on the shop floor, so why would I continue my dues? Edited December 12, 2012 by right2worker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 The UAW mission from the top will be to go around and tell it's members in order to get represented by the union they have to continue paying dues. hahah I am not for a "Right to Work" state because it takes power away from the union. However employees that get screwed by the union and get crap representation daily will now be thinking twice about paying dues, and the funny part is, the UAW still has to represent that employee working on the line!. Union leaders better do you're jobs now.. lol That's funny I just heard an interview with Bob King where he acknowledged that no worker had to join the union under federal law even before RTW. "We have workplaces with 100%, some at 98%. Overwhelmingly, UAW members join because they're fair people. Workers democratically vote to have a union in their workplace. They don't have to be members. Under the law of the U.S., any worker can say they don't want to be a member," said King. http://www.michiganradio.org/post/stateside-uaw-president-bob-king-addresses-right-work Nothing wrong with that. It is the truth. MI RTW does NOT effect ANY EXISTING CONTRACTS ! What does that mean? A closed shop or Union security clause only requires that the employee opt out of the union not that they have to join to maintain employment. No union security clause can ACTUALLY require membership as Federal law does not allow that. So all that happens is that you will join the union upon hiring and then have to contact the union to resign your membership which is known as exercising your Beck Rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatso Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Maybe Michigan becoming a Right To Work State will attract business that otherwise would not have come here.Isnt that a good thing for all?Once the business is established in Michigan the UAW can still try and organize the workers.Remember that the UAW makes money off of our dues and from what I have experienced lately a lot of consideration has been given to Ford`s profits over what is fair or what could be made nicer for the UAW employees.I mean the UAW does what is in their best interest.I dont think RTW will have much of an impact at the big three because management is so ignorant to hourly employees that,I want a union.I will remain a dues paying memeber. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReDemption Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 It’s a funny thing when talking to these “so called” RTW supporter Union members and they say they dont need a Union but need a grievance because the Company screwed them out of some contractual rights. Strange, anyways I guess time will tell how this all shakes out. But you really need to understand your rights within the law. Read Becks, its a good start. Then you may want to look up agency fees in a Union Shop within a RTW state. Anyways, for those of you that think the RTW will bring new jobs, here’s some interesting reading. Economic Policy Institute findings: Despite ambitious claims by proponents, the evidence is overwhelming that: • Right-to-work laws have not succeeded in boosting employment growth in the states that have adopted them. • The case of Oklahoma – closest in time to the conditions facing those states now considering such legislation – is particularly discouraging regarding the law’s ability to spur job growth. Since the law passed in 2001, manufacturing employment and relocations into the state reversed their climb and began to fall, precisely the opposite of what right-to-work advocates promised. • For those states looking beyond traditional or low wage manufacturing jobs – whether to higher-tech manufacturing, to “knowledge” sector jobs, or to service industries dependent on consumer spending in the local economy – there is reason to believe that right-to-work laws may actually harm a state’s economic prospects Have a Merry Chrismas and a Happy New Year. Jeff Hodges UAW Local 600 Dearborn Stamping & Truck Body 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FANTASTICFORD Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Jeff, it is funny! People are happy about cut wages and benefits in order to attract out of state business, really? You don't have to go far to ask the questions to friends and family members that took buyouts. Ask them how are they doing on their non union JOBS compared to what they had at Ford? Ask the educated ones too! I transferred from VA a RTW state in order to keep my job. I knew I was not going to find any non union job compare or anywhere near to what I have with Ford. I totally disagree with 2nd tiers and voted against it. How many times have you guys received phone calls from people asking, how can they get back with Ford? Everyone I've talked to that worked at NAP said they would come back for $15 hour because it's better then what they are making now! I have educated friends and family members that makes a very good income but my benefits as a whole are better than theirs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReDemption Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 I hear you Fantasticford, I was talking about those that feel they don’t need a Union as they are asking the Union to fix their issue. I’m sorry that the buyout didn’t work out for you and I understand your concern with the 2nd tier wages. I know that they negotiated an increased their pay ($19.28) with the new contract. It’s not parity, you or I don’t have to agree with it, I’m just saying that it was an increase. Anyways, I was just saying that I find it funny that the employees that say they don’t need a Union, call the Union the most. Jeff Hodges UAW Local 600 Dearborn Stamping & Truck Body 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FANTASTICFORD Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 (edited) Jeff, the transferred worked great for me because I moved to Mi to work at DTP and now at LAP. I'm very grateful for the move I made to keep my union job. I got your point and I agree with you..getting out of the union is not the answer. I use the example of people that took buyouts because they were in the union at one time and now many have to deal with non union companies. Although I disagree with certain things that happened in our last contract, we still came out better by having a union. Edited December 17, 2012 by FANTASTICFORD 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.