Because those who think idealogialy often do not take the time ot consider things like facts, reality and implications of a stance, but latch on to one point of view haphazardously, then cling to it to the bitter end wrong or right.
Still looking for some one with a perspective on right-to-work for its merits and dowfalls in the field of reality. =\ --- In [email protected], Cory Nott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't think you understand what "Right to work" means in this case. It means that people have the right to work for an employer - and the employer has the right to hire them regardless of whether they are a member of a union. It has nothing to do with forcing an employer to hire that person or forcing that person to work for an employer. It has nothing to do with whether or not an employer can fire an employee, though it may make it easier if that employee is not a member of a union. > > The standard argument against Right-To-Work laws is that they allow non-Union employees to take advantage of the collective bargaining agreements. Ie. they are free riders. > > I'm not entirely sure why you think "Right To Work" means that the employer cannot choose whether or not to hire you. We all have the fundamental right to enter into a contract with any willing entity in order to trade our labor for material wealth. That is, essentially, the right to work. Whether or not anyone will hire you is a matter of property rights and freedom of association and doesn't preclude you from your right to work. What we have is a situation where unions have the power to exclude anyone who is not a union member from working in a union shop. The employer cannot hire non-union people without breaking the law. > > > > > > > hrearden_hr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], "Cory Nott" <corynott@> wrote: > If anything, right-to-work protects freedom of association by > > allowing them to choose not to be a member of a union and still work > at a > > "union shop." > > > It does not protect freedom because no person has the freedom to work > for a particular employer. Employers have a right to establish the > conditions of employment because they are the creators of jobs. Nobody > has the right to work for an employer without the employer's consent. > Right to work laws deny freedom. > > $ > > > > > > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian > > > > SPONSORED LINKS > Libertarian English language Political parties Online dictionary American politics > > --------------------------------- > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > > Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > --------------------------------- > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
