Look deeper, your asking the wrong questions.
Correct
The company I work for profits are up 12% but sales are up 3%. Want to guess the year over year inflation rate for our industry?
And that gives them the right to price gouge the public? Where do you get your morality from?
The objective is power and profit.
And what industry would that be? Maybe they should just use inflation as an excuse to raise their prices, as others have done.
Are you employed, zir ?
Not in the traditional way. I don’t have a boss. Been there, done that. No thanks! Right-to-work states take rights away from workers so the boss can do just about anything they want.
Okay, @castoli has once again mentioned “right-to-work” states. We need to define what this means.
I might be missing something, but as I understand it a “right-to-work” state only means that the state prohibits unions from being “closed shop.” And nothing else specifically.
It does the EXACT opposite. It gives you the right to work without being forced to join a union.
2 Likes
What rights are taken away from workers
We have labors to prevent abuse, we have HR departments that protect the workers and/or the corporation
once again you have no clue
There are some good HR departments out there, but it seems for the most part the job is to protect the corporation, not the worker. I actually like the HR dept. where I am, but I think that is an exception.
I work for the largest utility corporation in the USA, and HR will not fire anyone unless you steal time or product, have sex on the job or you are complete offensive
HR actually gives the workers a second chance
It ought to say right-to-work for less as the pay in right-to-work states are typically less.
And what about less pay?
What does that even mean? “Right-to-work” only applies to union laborers. If you have a job that isn’t unionized, nothing is different regardless of whether the state is “right-to-work” or not.
Exactley, right to work states do not and cannot prevent unionization
Thats an agreement the company and the individual worker come too, has nothing to do with unions or right to work
1 Like
And that is how it is supposed to be. With EEO and Affirmative Action, HR was there to protect the corporation from law suits. They made sure that the corporation complied with all labor laws.
There is nothing wrong with hiring good HR people that know how to communicate with the workers.
I assume he’s talking about the net effect of right-to-work laws, rather than simply what the letter of the law states.
Statistically, right-to-work states pay significantly less for the same labor jobs. You’re welcome to look it up, it’s a pretty well known thing so I didn’t bother to share a link. If you just google it, you’ll find dozens of links, you can read whatever suits you on the subject. Poverty rates are also higher in right-to-work states.
There are plenty of jobs in the world where the ‘right-to-work’ thing doesn’t apply at all, of course. But there are many states in this country that rely heavily on manufacturing/other industries that are largely unionized, and in THOSE states, the law matters a lot.
I own a metal fabrication company in Texas, a right-to-work state. I can tell you that nothing about the right-to-work status benefits my employees. It benefits me very directly. I can fire/let go of someone for basically any reason, even illegal reasons, because non-union employees are far less likely to fight an unlawful firing in court. If I have an employee I just don’t like, I can fire him, call it ‘for cause’, make up a reason, and 99% of the time I would get away with it because no union will fight for him. The responsibility is entirely on him, and while we’d all love to say ‘well, he has the ability to hire a lawyer, and take you to court, blah blah blah’, it’s not realistic. A dude who was previously making 12 bucks an hour, and now not even that, has no reasonable capacity to seek legal counsel, or invest the time/money involved to sue me. It’s not worth the risk, his time and effort is better spent just finding a new job and moving on.
All of this also helps to suppress wages. When you make employees more expendable, when they have to worry about losing their jobs just because an employer doesn’t like them, employers end up having to pay less, because they have all the leverage.
1 Like
And on the other side of the coin, and i have personally witnessed this in the different union jobs i was associated with…IBEW and TEAMSTERS…there were workers who were useless, not doing their jobs, fucking up, calling in sick all the time or just being lazy, making very good union wages and the company could not get rid of them because they were protected and had the backing of the union.
1 Like