1. Welcome to Georgia Tech Swarm! JOIN US and be a part of the SWARM! GO JACKETS! THWg!

The US Supreme Court Served Up A Major Defeat To Labor Unions

Discussion in 'The Swarm Lounge' started by MikeJackets1967, Jun 27, 2018.

  1. MikeJackets1967

    MikeJackets1967 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    14,889
    Whiskey_Clear likes this.
  2. TechnicalPossum

    TechnicalPossum Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    775
    Caveat to the ruling. As ruled, it will likely only apply to public sector unions as the big issue was the state extracting the fees being a 1st Amendment issue.
     
  3. MikeJackets1967

    MikeJackets1967 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    14,889
    I don't think Federal Workers should be allowed to have a labor union since that make their living off of everyone's taxes. It was a mistake to allow them to organize.
     
    GT_05 likes this.
  4. WreckinGT

    WreckinGT Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    999
    I see that we are continuing to make working for the federal government a fairly awful experience.
     
  5. TechnicalPossum

    TechnicalPossum Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    775
    I disagree. They, like all workers, should have the right to organize and collectively bargain. Working for the government shouldn't change that. I could be ok with limits to work stoppages on local levels, but an outright ban on unionization would be a clear 1st amendment violation.

    My issue with public sector unions is their contributions to political campaigns. In essence, they are funding the people with which they want to negotiate the next contract. If the union funds a candidate and they win, when it comes time to go to the table, the union can leverage campaign support in the next election for contract benefits. This feels a lot like extortion of taxpayer money.
     
    MikeJackets1967 likes this.
  6. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    11,389
    I vehemently disagree, for the exact reason you put in your second paragraph, which contradicts your first paragraph. Negotiating a contract across from the table from a friend of whom you donated campaign money while negotiating using someone else's money is a ridiculous concept to me. Its bankrupting every state in the union. You end up with all kinds of ridiculous situations - like in many areas where a teacher's union representative of 25 years can work 1 single day as a teacher and qualify for a full pension from both the union and from the school district, all funded by the taxpayers. Or in the federal government, where you can receive multiple full pensions as long as you work in different branches of the federal government. I have a ex-neighborhood friend on full pension right now from the Coast Guard who is working inside Homeland Security drawing a full 6 figure+ salary. You shouldn't be able to retire yet still work with the same employer and draw double, LOL. But when you're negotiating with a friend over someone else's money its easy to do.

    Not to mention the fact pensions are silly financial instruments anyway. Why you would incent people with large amounts of money to NOT work for you is beyond me. If a medical invention was released tomorrow which increased everyone's life expectancy by 20 years, we should be in the streets celebrating. But every government organization with pensions would have to immediately file for bankruptcy. You should offer 401ks and match them with as large a percentage as you want. If someone wants to quit and move on, your obligation to them as an employee stops immediately - it doesn't continue on for the next many decades.
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2018
  7. TechnicalPossum

    TechnicalPossum Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    775
    I was likely unclear. They should be allowed to unionize as long as they are banned from making campaign contributions.
     
    MikeJackets1967 likes this.
  8. MikeJackets1967

    MikeJackets1967 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    14,889
  9. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    11,389
    I just read part of the dissent which Kagan read in court. She didn't say anything related to actual law and the constitution. She dissented with overturning a solution that they felt had been workable for the last 40 years to prevent 'free-riders' from getting the benefits unions might achieve without having to pay into them. I mean, I get it, but as a court you interpret the law against the constitution. Whether or not something matches your political beliefs or produces 'free-riders' should be irrelevant.
     
    MikeJackets1967 likes this.
  10. AE 87

    AE 87 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    12,990
    I'm sympathetic. The concerns raised by @bwelbo are real and incline me against public-sector unions, but this solution might work.
     
    MikeJackets1967 likes this.
  11. TechnicalPossum

    TechnicalPossum Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    775
    The dissent was garbage I'd expect from Sotomayor, not something decently thought through that I disagree with as Kagan usually provides.

    I found this part of the dissent particularly galling:

    DgtBe-fU8AQ3_Rv.jpg

    The idea that there was no reason to overrule Abood is a falsehood. Depriving people of their right to choose their associations and what private entities they fund with their money is reason enough.
     
  12. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    11,389
    Its not perfect, because you're still negotiating with someone else's money who isn't at the table. But you could make the argument that's what elections are for. Such an arrangement would at least be a much better approach than where we are now.
     
  13. MikeJackets1967

    MikeJackets1967 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    14,889
    Getting those fees from everyone whether they're union members or not is the union leadership's top priority;)

    https://www.illinoispolicy.org/janus-v-afscme-the-myth-of-free-riders/
     
    TechnicalPossum likes this.
  14. MikeJackets1967

    MikeJackets1967 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    14,889
  15. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    11,389
    I love how the article quotes him as "conservative" with quotations, LOL. Indeed, he was one of the judges who upheld Roe vs. Wade, which created a Right to Privacy, which does not exist in the Constitution. The list of unconstitutional decisions he's made in his life are too long to name. One of my favorites is the Kelo decision (Kelo vs New London) which grants government the right to take private property if it deems it can get more tax revenue out of it by using it a different way than it is today. That is just hilarious.

    Somewhere right now, Harry Reid is taking another punch to his left eye by a pack of progressives for removing the filibuster option for judicial appointments.

    On a side note, the government did confiscate the property in that case so that someone else could develop it in a way that would generate more tax revenue for the city. However, that developer could never secure financing, so the property is sitting there undeveloped. So essentially what happened is the government took someone's property and gave it to someone else LOL.
     
    MikeJackets1967 likes this.
  16. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    8,380
    And yertle is chuckling out loud how he effed Obama, the American public and Garland. SMFH I hope like hell I live long enough to see what comes around, goes around.
     
  17. MikeJackets1967

    MikeJackets1967 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    14,889
    Yeah Kennedy was no conservative you're right about that(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2018
  18. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    11,389
    That's the way politics works. That's why decisions like Harry Reid's are so bad - the other side will always end up using it against you. Not allowing a supreme court justice in someone's last year of their Presidency I thought was how its always been. If there is a supreme court justice that was nominated in an election year in the last year of a Presidency, I'd love to see. I can't think of any going back to at least WWII. With the usual caveat I'm wrong a lot. The Supreme Court was a major issue in the election, so I wouldn't say America got f'd - they spoke on it actually.
     
    MikeJackets1967 likes this.
  19. MikeJackets1967

    MikeJackets1967 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    14,889
    Harry Reid is a hypocrite and probably the worst Mormon around,the Mormon Elders would have disfellowshipped him long ago had he not given the LDS Church so much money over the years:rolleyes:
     
  20. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    11,389
    Yep, that quote says it all. You should never be taking political considerations into your decisions. Also, being worried about how 1 political side might celebrate or not seems especially immature to me.
     
    MikeJackets1967 likes this.

Share This Page