Weather

Current Conditions
1.1C
Partly Cloudy
Today's Forecast
4C
Chance of rain showers or wet flurries
Sponsored by Highland Ford

News And Views

Classifieds

Announcements

Entertainment

Shop Local

More Local

Search The Web

Google Search

Local News

Landmark votes make Michigan a 'right-to-work' state

Tuesday, December 11, 2012   by: Rick McGee

Michigan legislators today approved two so-called "right-to-work" bills as angry protesters rallied at the Capital in Lansing.

The controversial legislation significantly weakens union power.

By a margin of 58 to 51, the Republican-dominated House of Representatives first passed a measure that deals with public sector workers.

A little later, the second bill - covering private sector workers - passed 58 to 52.

Among other things, the measures end the requirement that workers pay union dues as a condition of employment.

The State Senate has already approved both bills.

Gov. Rick Snyder is expected to sign them this week.

Today's developments mean Michigan will become the 24th "right-to-work" state.

Comments
13
Please sign in to post a response
Note: Comments that appear on the site are not the opinion of SooToday.com. Keep discussions civil and on topic. Refrain from obscenity and don't post anything that your grandmother would be ashamed to read. Those who do not abide by these guidelines will have their membership revoked without notice. If you see an abusive post, please click the link beside the post to report it.
cheemo 12/11/2012 4:41:32 PM Report

the widening gap between rich and poor
muf 12/11/2012 5:02:48 PM Report

Agreed Cheemo. Big business just got bigger in Michigan.
Mopar 12/11/2012 6:38:55 PM Report

Actually private sector unions have little power anyway and it eliminates the breeding ground for mediocrity that unions perpetuate.
learningaswego 12/11/2012 10:33:42 PM Report

Nonsense.
With this new law - and badly needed in Canada, now millions of people can avoid money being extorted from their pay cheques, and funneled to organizations and politicians they don't support.
Even socialists countries around the world have the same kind of right to work legislation. Canada is in the dark ages, with our archaic laws, which still allows unions to extort money from workers, which is used to suit their own agendas.
bigG47 12/11/2012 10:39:11 PM Report

There would be no need for unions, if employers
would pay a good wage for a good days work, and treat their employees as they would want to be treated. They have historically chosen not to do so, so the working man formed unions to force them to be fair. I believe if unions are dismantled, as big business and the Republicans wish, it will be the end of the middle-class as we know it. God forbid !!








Number One Son 12/11/2012 11:29:58 PM Report

Exactly right G47, .... learningaswego hasn't learned a thing. He had better eat a lot of Kraft Dinner now, because if that is the route he wants to take, Kraft Dinner will be a delicacy in the future.
funkywalker 12/12/2012 6:09:06 AM Report

It's only extortion if it's against their will, if they don't like it then why are they in a union? Employers can also look forward to unskilled/untrained workers doing their work, this most likely means poorer quality end product and it's probably going to be done in an unsafe manner. No fault of the non-union unskilled worker, they don't know any better. So, when WSIB rates go up for the company's from a critical injury (or worse), the wages eventually come down, and voila, lower wages!
learningaswego 12/12/2012 12:42:14 PM Report

If it's so bad, why do socialist, heavily-unionized countries around the world, have "right to work" legislation?

Unions are so necessary, employees at hugely successful and rapidly growing companies like Toyota and Honda, have rejected unions there.
muf 12/12/2012 4:46:38 PM Report

Yes but on the other side of the coin there are companies that do not want long term employees. Keep them around for 8 to 10 years then look to get rid of them .Why because they feel that the veteran employee is now a liability because they are older . Bring in the newbies, cheaper wages less benefits.

right to work ......For Less.
right to work ......or Be Terminated
funkywalker 12/12/2012 4:51:11 PM Report

learningaswego, I would suggest that the reason they rejected a union is because they have never worked in one. Would you rather have benefits, pension and a safe place to work or not?
sitka_archie 12/12/2012 5:59:56 PM Report

I can't help but laugh at people like learning as we go. He just can't help but be an ignorant fool. I'd hate to 'assume' anything about anyone...but I assume Learningaswego is either a business owner, or someone who's never worked in construction or heavy industry. I'd like to see him work on both union and non-union construction/ industrial jobs and then give me his opinion. I did....and guess were I am now...
funkywalker 12/12/2012 7:18:09 PM Report

Well put sitka
moem 12/12/2012 11:59:56 PM Report

Unions serve a purpose in private sector they have no place in the public purse!!! Lots of non union people have benefits, and retirement packages either through employer rrsp contributions or pension
There are also employment standards in place
Comments
13
Please sign in to post a response
Note: Comments that appear on the site are not the opinion of SooToday.com. Keep discussions civil and on topic. Refrain from obscenity and don't post anything that your grandmother would be ashamed to read. Those who do not abide by these guidelines will have their membership revoked without notice. If you see an abusive post, please click the link beside the post to report it.
Advertising | Membership | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About SooToday.com | Contact Us | Feedback

Copyright ©2014 SooToday.com - All rights reserved