tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6791034736397293935.post2153288454382741354..comments2023-10-23T11:15:56.395-07:00Comments on Unhealthy Work: Swedish Capitalist Learn U.S. Labor not so CheapPLSchnallhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14769024988823648519noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6791034736397293935.post-39460791146091300502011-08-30T08:05:58.726-07:002011-08-30T08:05:58.726-07:00I agree completely with the excellent posts above....I agree completely with the excellent posts above. The Taft-Hartley Act outlawed the "closed shop" in the United States in 1947. Thus, an employer may not lawfully agree with a union to hire only union members. Employers may, on the other hand, agree to require employees to join the union (union shop) or pay the equivalent of union dues (agency shop, agency fee) to it after a set period of time. <br /> Since union shop contracts don't exist in the public sector, they would only cover a fraction of the 7.2% of private sector workers who are union members in the U.S. Thus, very few U.S. workers are covered by such contracts.<br /> The proponents of "right to know" also fail to point out the benefits of living in countries with high unionization rates, such as the Scandinavian countries -- a high standard of living, greater rights at work, and greater social mobility and and a longer life expectancy than in the U.S.Paul Landsbergishttp://www.downstate.edu/publichealth/departments/faculty/landsbergis.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6791034736397293935.post-51418376944377488452011-08-29T12:48:31.180-07:002011-08-29T12:48:31.180-07:00Comment sent to us by Marnie Dobson:
I would add ...Comment sent to us by Marnie Dobson:<br /><br />I would add this comment about the National Right to Work committee’s problematic anti-union appeal, that we should also be calling into question the obfuscating and frankly ridiculous slogan “right to work.” Even in the “non-right-to-work” states such as California, union membership is still voluntary and not being a member of a union does not prevent one from working. In fact, management rights over hiring are fastidiously protected by big business and are never negotiable during collective bargaining. Unions can’t force management to only hire union members. I can think of only a few examples, such as in the music and movie industries, where union membership carries a certain amount of weight and carries over from work project to work project and where union membership is a prerequisite for working on a “union project.” But even then producers can still run a non-union show (and many more are doing this going overseas to Eastern Europe, Canada etc.). SAG and AFM union members are discouraged from doing non-union shows in the US as this basically undercuts their own (and others) wages, undermining the agreed upon union scale. These unions are all renegotiating lower and lower union scales, incidentally, to try and keep “low budget” movies and music projects in the United States. <br /> <br />In more standard and unionized workplaces, however, all workers enjoying the benefits of a collectively bargained contract (health and safety provisions, wage increases, workload protections, grievance processes, benefits etc.) pay “agency fees,” but not all have to be union members in order to work in that workplace! Union membership provides one a voice in the democratic structure of the union and in supporting the representative power of a union during collective bargaining. Thus the “Right to Work” campaign is spreading a vapid misconception about “forced unionism.”PLSchnallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14769024988823648519noreply@blogger.com