THIS MADNESS HAS TO STOP!!!!

Longer, seriously, you crack me up. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

"In our glorious fight for civil rights, we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, such as 'right to work.' It is a law to rob us of our civil rights and job rights. It is supported by Southern segregationists who are trying to keep us from achieving our civil rights and our right of equal job opportunity. Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining by which unions have improved wages and working conditions of everyone…Wherever these laws have been passed, wages are lower, job opportunities are fewer and there are no civil rights. We do not intend to let them do this to us. We demand this fraud be stopped. Our weapon is our vote."

Martin Luther King Jr —Speaking on right-to-work laws in 1961

I haz qwotz 2.

A map of right to work states looks darn near identical to the 2008 electoral map, so its certainly a hot button issue.

Here is the Kansas version:

No person shall be denied the opportunity to obtain or retain employment because of membership or nonmembership in any labor organization, nor shall the state or any subdivision thereof, or any individual, corporation, or any kind of association enter into any agreement, written or oral, which excludes any person from employment or continuation of employment because of membership or nonmembership in any labor organization.

Longer, you haz qwotz, I haz qwotz. Try this from George Meany:

"Certain business leaders may consider "big government" or socialism more of an immediate threat to their interests than communism. Are they allowing themselves to be deluded by their own propaganda to the effect that organized labor in this country is in favor of big government or the nationalization of industry? Nothing could be further from the truth. The main function of American trade unions is collective bargaining. It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government. Unions, as well as employers, would vastly prefer to have even Government regulation of labor-management relations reduced to a minimum consistent with the protection of the public welfare..."

I agree with Dr. King about unions when in a private sector context. In fact, I used to organize for the UFCW. Private sector unions are a counterbalance to corporate greed. Public sector unions try to stick their hands farther in the taxpayers' pockets. There are many more protections for government workers than there are in the private sector. Collective bargaining in the public sector tips the balance way too far in the worker's favor. The citizens can be held hostage by public sector unions.

So now we have FDR and George Meany opposed to public sector unions. I agree with them.

"The desire of Government employees for fair and adequate pay, reasonable hours of work, safe and suitable working conditions, development of opportunities for advancement, facilities for fair and impartial consideration and review of grievances, and other objectives of a proper employee relations policy, is basically no different from that of employees in private industry. Organization on their part to present their views on such matters is both natural and logical, but meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government."

FDR, from the same letter that you got that butchered Heritage Foundation quote. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

FDR was talking about strikes, not collective bargaining.

...and if your dead set on taking the Wayback Machine to the 1950's like Michael J. Fox, then don't forget the tax rate on the upper tax bracket!

Longer, you failed again. No one is opposed to

"fair and adequate pay, reasonable hours of work, safe and suitable working conditions, development of opportunities for advancement, facilities for fair and impartial consideration and review of grievances, and other objectives of a proper employee relations policy,"

But FDR went on to say:

"[B]ut meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government."

Working for the government is different than private industry. FDR and George Meany understood that. And last I checked, the teachers in Wisconsin were striking, although they called it a "sick out". And who is being hurt? The students and their taxpaying parents. You see, it's not evil corporate management being hurt, it's the everyday working slob. There aren't excess corporate profits that should be shared with the workers, there is only higher taxes for, you guessed it, the everyday working taxpayer. That's why there is a difference between public sector and private sector unions.

And your stereotype fails again. I didn't get the quote from the Heritage Foundation. Your straw man is still standing, and you are still hilarious. Me love you, Longer time!

So now we have FDR and George Meany opposed to public sector unions. I agree with them. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

The Heritage Foundation has you agreeing that it is impossible for public unions to collectively bargain with the government. Not only do you ignore that they've successfully done that for what, 60 years? But you go on to claim that IT WORKS TOO WELL! You're incoherent! How can citizens be "held hostage" by something that is IMPOSSIBLE????

If those men were alive today they'd tell you not to trust a word coming from the Heritage Foundation (brought to you by the Koch brothers).

I didn't get the quote from the Heritage Foundation. Your straw man is still standing, and you are still hilarious. Me love you, Longer time! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Did you take the Wayback Machine to last week to get this quote you posted yesterday?

F.D.R. Warned Us

Updated February 19, 2011, 09:38 PM
James Sherk is the Bradley fellow in labor policy at the Center for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation.

“It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government.”

That wasn’t Newt Gingrich, or Ron Paul, or Ronald Reagan talking. That was George Meany -- the former president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O -- in 1955. Government unions are unremarkable today, but the labor movement once thought the idea absurd.

Public sector unions insist on laws that serve their interests -- at the expense of the common good.
The founders of the labor movement viewed unions as a vehicle to get workers more of the profits they help create. Government workers, however, don’t generate profits. They merely negotiate for more tax money. When government unions strike, they strike against taxpayers. F.D.R. considered this “unthinkable and intolerable.”

Government collective bargaining means voters do not have the final say on public policy. Instead their elected representatives must negotiate spending and policy decisions with unions. That is not exactly democratic – a fact that unions once recognized.

George Meany was not alone. Up through the 1950s, unions widely agreed that collective bargaining had no place in government. But starting with Wisconsin in 1959, states began to allow collective bargaining in government. The influx of dues and members quickly changed the union movement’s tune, and collective bargaining in government is now widespread. As a result unions can now insist on laws that serve their interests – at the expense of the common good.

Union contracts make it next to impossible to reward excellent teachers or fire failing ones. Union contracts give government employees gold-plated benefits – at the cost of higher taxes and less spending on other priorities. The alternative to Walker's budget was kicking 200,000 children off Medicaid.

Governor Walker’s plan reasserts voter control over government policy. Voters’ elected representatives should decide how the government spends their taxes. More states should heed the A.F.L.-C.I.O. Executive Council’s 1959 advice: “In terms of accepted collective bargaining procedures, government workers have no right beyond the authority to petition Congress — a right available to every citizen.”

"and if your dead set on taking the Wayback Machine to the 1950's like Michael J. Fox,"

Mister Peabody

That's not where I got it, sorry to disappoint you, Longer. But that is a great article, I hadn't seen it before.

You still crack me up!

Name your source. I'll draw you a map back to the first use of that quote in relation to Wisconsin. Did you fail to notice the date on that article or do I need to make the font bigger?

I'm starting to think that your really truly believe that your source independently came up with that quote, and has nothing to do with the Heritage Foundation article that used it just a few days prior. That's just delusional.

"and if your dead set on taking the Wayback Machine to the 1950's like Michael J. Fox,"

Mister Peabody Originally Posted by lacrew_2000

Don't make me Rule 34.

I found a NWO article on it from 2010...maybe that's where Heritage found it.