Wisconsin Judge Declines to Block Right To Work Law

[Myrina]

Source: WBAY TV Green Bay


http://wbay.com/2015/03/19/wisconsin-judge-to-hold-hearing-on-right-to-work-challenge/

MADISON, Wis. (AP) – A Madison judge has declined to block Wisconsin’s new right-to-work law.

Dane County Circuit Judge William Foust rejected a request by three unions to grant temporary injunction blocking the law during a hearing on Thursday. The law will remain in effect while the unions’ lawsuit proceeds. The unions, including the Wisconsin AFL-CIO, say the law amounts to an unconstitutional seizure of their property because it allows workers who don’t pay union dues to still receive union benefits.

State attorneys say the law is constitutional since it technically doesn’t take any money out of union coffers.


Read more: http://wbay.com/2015/03/19/wisconsin-judge-to-hold-hearing-on-right-to-work-challenge/

---

Motherflubber

[cstanleytech]

1. I am curious what union benefits exactly are they referring to that they will continue to receive?

Also if they dont want to pay shouldnt they be kicked out of the union and the union shouldnt assist them in any way nor should any protections and pay the union has negotiated for as far as their jobs apply to the non union workers?

[Fred Sanders]

2. Worker safety, for starters? Work day and work week length? Sick leave? Vacation pay? Etc.....

[cstanleytech]

3. All of that though shouldnt apply though I would think if someone leaves the union after all

arent those contracts with the union and for its members and if your not a member you shouldnt get any of the benefits and besides if a company tries to break its contract with the union and have hire none union members cant the unions sue the company for breach of contract?

[maxrandb]

4. Would be nice if it worked that way

but what happens is, say I'm an Electrician and in a Union. My Union has negotiated pay and benefits. The company hires a non-union electrician who gets the same pay and benefit that I do, but contributed nothing to the negotiations to get that wage and benefit. He's basically mooching off the work of unions, and paying nothing for it.

I know it may be a bit more complicated than that, but that's the general gist of it.

These "Right to Screw Over Workers" laws are nothing but an attempt to weaken labor unions to the point they are worthless.

It pisses me the hell off. My Grandfather helped organize miners in the coal mines of Corning, OH. Unions, in large part, helped build the Middle Class during our last century, and we're seeing it all being torn down.

And I'll give you another example. I worked at a large grocery store chain in Ohio back in the 70's and 80's. We were not Union, but our major competitor was. We got the same pay and benefits of the union chain, because if we didn't, we would have organized and joined. So in just that one example, and there are millions of them all over America, the negotiating power of the unions increased pay across the board

We have a great deal of problems in this country, but the one problem we don't have is that the working man has too much power

[cstanleytech]

5. What about getting limits on the number of 3rd party workers hired though or getting

the company in the union contract to agree to hire them only for say a month and not rehire them for up to a year?

[Fred Sanders]

6. What about just having unions with a mandatory dues unionized work force?

[cstanleytech]

9. I have no problem with that. What I am mainly wondering

is what can the unions do to counter not being to collect such dues and contracts that limit the hiring and or benefits of people who decide to opt out might be the unions only hope.

[HereSince1628]

7. Unions cant kick out nonunion members.

[Myrina]

10. Wages.

My GUESS would be that non Union members still get paid the same wages as Union workers, so the claim is that the non-unions are benefitting from the wage negotiations etc.

[Geronimoe]

8. What about taxation?

The vast majority of Americans are forced to pay taxes and are not represented by elected officials, Scott Walker being the perfect example of this. The Unions are not allowed to collect union dues and those not paying, still get the benefits.

So it seems there much more than a double standard.

[maxrandb]

12. We need to stop calling them "dues"

because in this WI example and all across the country, these are NOT full union dues. They are a small percentage of full union dues that is used specifically for collective bargaining expenses. They cannot be used for any political purpose. They can't be donated to a political party. They can't be donated to a candidate. They can't be used in political ads.

Nothing scares the Republicans more than "organized American workers". That's just a fact.

It's getting to the point where the only thing that will send a message to stop this attack on unions is a General Nationwide Strike

[Omaha Steve]

11. "Since it technically doesn’t take any money out of union coffers"

It takes the fair share $ out of their coffers!!!

[Android3.14]

13. Unsurprised

The lack of any judicial support for the union's case should be a signal to change tactics.

This whole fight is a tool the GOPers are using to make Democrats look like they hate the Constitution. They have won the effort to frame this situation.

Instead of trying to force people to pay money that many think supports organizations they find antithetical to their own ideology in a direct affront to the First Amendment, the unions should be fighting to force non-union members to negotiate their own wages and benefits rather than benefiting from union efforts.

To continue to fight this battle is a waste of union monies.

Chapter 8 of Sun Tzu's Art of War is appropriate in this instance.

(Note - I support unions, was a member of a union for many years, and believe the goals of a living wage, shorter work week and a safe work environment are what workers deserve and unions should strive to provide.)

[rladdi]

14. The Republicans have padded all the courts in the USA with conservatives judges to do their work.

No longer does law makers make or change laws, the judge does.

[midnight]

15. kick