this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2024
627 points (98.6% liked)
unions
1398 readers
170 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Right to work is just a slogan. Its "At will employment" Everyone has known since the beginning its true intent. Its why I have always heard it called the 'right to fire'
I was so confused when I first heard about "at will employment" because the way they soften it up to sound like a positive thing also implies that there are places where you legally can't quit your job. But they're not trying to imply that; they're merely dancing around the fact it means you can be fired without needing a reason. Which makes sense only if you think about whose will is being invoked.
It came about in this state when a major project was in the works. They passed those laws thinking they would wipe out unemployment in the state. After those suckers/fools/sell outs voted it in all the rat outfits came in with shiploads of their own rats from out of state. Sure they used a few scut work locals but they gutted the unions and pay fell. Same story different day. The irony is after the project neared completion those same rat companies had to hire union labor to fix all the fuck ups.
Right to work was passed during a period of labor surplus as a means of breaking unions. Now that we are entering a labor shortage I would expect a push to repeal them with corporate friendly employment contracts as the new norm.
They are two distinct things. Right to work is the right to work without being required to pay anything to a union. At will employment is the ability to fire you for any reason as long as it isn't a reason related to be a protected class.
They are both one and the same in this state.
Your state has both of them. That doesn't mean they are the same thing. My state is the same way, but the are still two different things
A point of difference that makes no difference. why obsess over such a trivial point? Especially when both are used in concert to subvert workers benefits and pay. Its almost like you support any kind argument to make people stray from the point.
Because only talking about one and thinking they are same thing ignores the other one and implies it isn't a problem. It's not pointless pedantry when they are distinct policies that are used to depress wages in different ways. Both should be eliminated and that's why we should acknowledge both and recognize the differences between them.
Citizens United is actively damaging to the lives of regular citizens, brought to you by the same folks who used the PATRIOT act to snoop on every conversation and build secret dungeon prisons all over the world. These are also the same people who use the National Socialist German Workers' Party as an example of socialism not working, it’s a conservative trait to fix proud sounding names to piles of horseshit and act like you’re wrong for reacting to the smell.