Union members went to federal court yesterday to try and block Indiana’s new Right-to-Work law from being enforced. Since several of you have asked me about this new controversial law in class, I thought now would be a good time to blog about it.
Governor Mitch Daniels signed the Right-to-Work legislation last month, making Indiana the 23rd state to ban unions from collecting mandatory fees for representation. Democrats objected and actually boycotted the Indiana House of Representatives for several days in an attempt to keep the bill from being voted on. Unions have also protested the bill they call the “Right-to-Work-for-Less”.
Governor Daniels says the new law will help “capture jobs” for which Indiana is not currently being considered. Proponents agree with Governor Daniels and say the new legislation will prohibit unions from requiring new and existing employees to become union members and pay dues for services they may not want or need. Opponents of the law say it creates a “free rider” problem, in which non-union employees benefit from the union’s collective bargaining power without having to pay dues. They also cite discrimination because public employees can’t opt out of the union like a private-sector employee could.
So, my question to you this week is, “What do you think of Indiana’s controversial new law? Is it good for Hoosiers?” Getting a good grasp on legislation such as this can be difficult, so you may have to do some research and consult several sources before you post your answer. Answers are du no later than Wednesday, February 29th, 2012. Happy Leap Year!
The reason unions were created is to protect the rights of workers. Employers can take advantage of employees and the reason people join unions is to insure that they have necessity such as insurance and competitive pay. Blue collar employees work hard and shouldn't get taken advantage of for corporate gain. This has been called the right-to-work-for-less bill and i'm in agreement limiting union authority and effectiveness is a bad idea on Daniels part.
ReplyDeletehttp://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/02/23/union-sues-indiana-over-right-to-work-law/
1st off when Daniels was running for governor he promised that Indiana would not become a Right to Work state. 2nd if there are workers that want to work in a shop that is union but don't want to pay union dues that's like a person wanting to be cop but not carry a gun. It's part of the job. 3rd The bill looks good on paper but the problem with it is it does nothing to protect union workers only to protect the hypothetical nonunion workers competing for the same jobs and the hypothetical jobs that might come to Indiana. 4th there were no pro Right to Work Act rallies or protests, how did our "reprensenatives" (the people that are ment to represent the will of the people) vote this bill into law in good conscience. 5th When a small group people in political power do what they feel is best for the people instead of what the people want it is called an oligarchy not a democracy.
ReplyDeleteThis law is taken away freedom of the people, Unions were made to protect the rights of workers. I feel Employers have the upper hand and can do what they want. I don't see how this law will help but I can see how it will hurt the people. Even if they want to protests they fear losing there jobs, even if their is a big problem with the employers. I can see why Hoosiers are fighting this law,this wasn't a good move for Daniel's to make.
ReplyDeleteThe new law is a terrible idea. Not only is it taking away wages and benefits from workers, it's also hurting the entire state. Upon doing some research, I found when wages fall, revenues from income and sales taxes fall as well. In turn, the state has a lot less money to fund programs such as education and transportation. Without proper funding, education systems will start cutting back programs, getting rid of jobs. It just creates a big, unnecessary mess.
ReplyDelete--Rebekah Cage
I also believe this law will not benefit us. Making this law to "capture jobs" isn't going to make us better than any other state if they have the same law too. My mother was in a union when she worked and it benefited her in a way that she could support her and me. This also will just create more problems in our economy instead of solving them.
ReplyDeleteWhile the unions were definitely needed when they came into power. The working conditions were at times deadly, the hours were long, pay was minimal and the bosses were not the nicest or friendliest people to work for. That has changed. The only reason there is such a stink is because the union has organized it. They paid employees to protest, they are the ones that stand to loose money and they don't want to loose money. Only 14% of the jobs in Indiana are union jobs. the horrors that are being portrayed in the media are brought to you to scare the hell out of you and make you think the sky will fall because of this. Guess what, IT WON'T!!
ReplyDeleteI don't like the concept of unions today. When workers were grossly mistreated and there were insufficient 'common-sense' labor laws to protect workers from abusive conditions, they were more necessary. But in modern America, should there really be a collective in which we all must pay into to get any job? Should we really have mandatory groups that require involvement for employment. For our whole country I say no. Union participation should not be mandatory for any job.
ReplyDeleteAs for these "free-riders" let them ride outside of the benefits. Let the value of the unions be defined by the loyalty of it's members and those who will do without them have separate benefits. Unions offer job security, by maintaining that the workers in place now will maintain their jobs so long as they stay in good standing with the union. With job security though, comes stagnancy for the job pool.
I have no doubt this law will shake things up a bit, but I cannot say if it will be for better or worse on Indiana, I think that will be dependent on how union members especially react.
This new law is a bad law all together. It does nothing for us in the work force. It is suppose to "help us" as Governor Daniels states, but it will really hinder us. ZBickett broke it down very well and helped me understand this new law more and why it is not good for us. I think there could have been more done to see that this law was not passed.
ReplyDeleteI think unions are outdated. There was a time when they were a good thing in some cases like when there was really bad working conditions and safety issues, but now they seem to be useless. Paying dues to a union who in actuality does nothing for you as an employee seems senseless to me. I am strictly anti-union. I have in-laws who became displaced workers when the Visteon plant in my hometown closed. After years of paying dues to a union they ended up with nothing. Most of the employees had worked there for 25 or more years and that's all they had ever done. They didn't need a college degree to do the jobs they were doing. After the plant closed their so-called union, wouldn't even pay for them to become educated so that they might seek other employment. So now our town is full of people who have no jobs. I say, down with unions!
ReplyDeleteDenise Halcomb
Due to my lack of knowledge about the Right-to-Work law I wasn’t sure if this law is a good or bad thing for Indiana. I didn’t know how to feel about the pasting of the Right-to-Work law because I didn’t really know what the law will do and how people will be affected. Although after some research I learned that the law made it illegal to make workers join a union or pay union dues in order to work, which I think is a good thing. However I also read something that said union and non-union wages have dropped in right-to-work states and that’s makes me think this law isn’t good for Hoosiers because nobody wants to get paid less.
ReplyDeletei hate the concept of a union.. lucky enough i don't work for a union. i agree with most of my fellow class members and say that this law is doing nothing for us.
ReplyDeleteWhy Dusten? What is wrong with being part of a union? I am not part of one. I am just curious...
DeleteI may not know all of the details about how this bill will negatively effect those who are a part of the union, but I honestly do not see why people would automatically want to pay due for something they don't need. If I got hired on and was required to be a union employee and pay dues to "benefits" that are not even relevant to my needs, I would be more inclined to support the new right to work bill. Aside from the bill, I have had some rather negative experiences dealing with employees who are part of a union. I'm not saying that all union employees are like this, but I know that some union employees are almost immune to being fired, even if they are not performing at their job at all. This means that they could be locked into a high paying salary and literally come in for coffee, sit down for hours doing minimal work and not benefiting the company at all... and they are protected by this "union." Personally in this day in age I am seeing more negative aspects of unions rather than positive.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Lorenzo about all this and I asked my parents all about it when I went home one weekend and apparently it doesn't seem to bode well for my poor aunt who is having her rights at work violated due to there being no Union and she doesn't even get breaks now. I worry much about her and want this law reformed now.
ReplyDeleteI honestly still dont understand whats so bad about a union, but i had a job once where they emphazised greatly on not letting me join. I read most of the comments but still dont quite grasp why its so bad...that being said, as what i see from the union because of this bill they can no longer collect dues? and if they cant then my though it that the people in the union might not get the same "great" benefit that they got before, this seeming to be a chaos waiting to happen!
ReplyDeleteI can see why the current union workers are angered by this. It seems unfair to them and from their perspective I do too. If Indiana were making a choice concerning new jobs and not current union run jobs I would be ok with this passing but because we already have and have had unions here it doesn't really make sense -It has still worked up to this point right? Why Change...
ReplyDeleteEven after researching this topic a bit I'm still confused. I've never known anything about unions or the kind of work that union workers do. At first glance this seems to be a good thing. Why should someone have to pay a fee to make sure they work under good conditions? But after reading everyone's comments I'm second guessing this concept. Everyone seems to disagree with the passing of this law. I suppose without the security that union workers fees allow for that there would be cut backs of some sort. As Miryah said, her aunt doesn't even get a break. I can see this being bad in that those who are paying the dues are still paying for the union rights for those who are not paying.
ReplyDeleteI'm not too sure if this law is good or not for Indiana. When researching more on the law it was stating how the existing states that have the law, have a higher standard of living, lower employment rates as well as more growth in manufacturing and agricultural jobs. Now all this may seem good but it does it really help and protect those who are currently in union employment,will it raise our standard of living or provide more economic flow to our state? Not too sure.
ReplyDeleteWell, I had to research this new law and looked a few different sites. I also had to look at what a union really is and how it can be helpful to be apart of one. I don't fully grasp the right-to-work law, but from what I get, it is not really benefitial. If this law takes away funds from the union that helps workers to have equal and protected rights, it's a huge mistake!!!
ReplyDeleteNo one who helped to form this country with dreams of hope, liberty, the pursuit of happyness for all, and such... would be very proud of this step.
So, in conclusion, I don't support it. It seems very wrong to me.
Anything that takes even the smallest freedom or assistance for happier living in the states is a sin against fellow men!
Having never really been apart of a union in my life, it is hard to judge whether or not this law is a mistake or not. From the concept that is in my head of this, it has both advantages and disadvantages. Yes it does leave the worker open for abuse with out the support. This law, in theory, will bring companies to Indiana that would be more hesitant because of the unions.
ReplyDeleteIt was mentioned above that if someone gets a job that requires them to join a union but they don't want to join is like becoming a cop that doesn't want to carry a gun. It's the same concept as someone joining a company that doesn't have a union under the knowledge that you could be abused. I am not sure whether this new law is a good one or not, I just know that no matter what there are benefits to both sides.
I have never had any personal experience with a union nor through anyone that is close to me. So that makes it difficult to determine if this piece of legislation is beneficial to Hoosiers or not. I recall being taught in I think middle school that unions were created to protect the employees, but is this bill really aimed at the members of the union or the union itself. Of this I am not so sure. But if I had to throw my best educated opinion at it I would say that it is more damaging to the Unions themselves more so then those within it so i would say that there is potential for it to benefit Hoosiers.
ReplyDeleteI still don't understand unions all that well but what I got from the new law is that it allows closed shops to now take advantage of new workers coming in and also allows for all industrial sect type jobs to decrease wages. With the presence of unions fading worker rights will also kind of get brushed under the rug. Their slowly phasing out unions who's purpose is to help and protect their employees. But I still need to do a lot of research about it still.
ReplyDeleteI think that the idea of unions is outdated for the most part but I agree with Lindsey. Why should nonunion workers get the same benefits as union workers get, but not have to pay for them?
ReplyDeleteI cant sayb that I agree,please excuse my ignorance but I'm not sure what the role of a Union initially is.I have always heard of them but I dont think that I have worked for a company that has Union employees. So I cant say that i agree with the decision of Governor Daniels. Now i do agree on anything that will bring jobs to Indiana only if it isnt jeopardizing the jobs of others who are already employeed
ReplyDeleteI think unions should be protected as much as possible. They were created for a reason and that is to protect the workers but I do believe union workers sometimes work the system. I'm not really sure how I feel about the decisions because it is something that doesn't effect me or anyone I know.
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to say if it's good or bad since it's such a controversial law. It's good for some, bad for others. Some unions protect people, some unions attack corporations. I'm not sure it directly relates to me as I am a freelancer. For those who embrace capitalism I'm not sure it would effect them too much. For those in which rely on the union to protect them then it obviously isn't the best law. I, unfortunately, feel like I'm rambling because this law doesn't effect me too much. I was raised republican so I wouldn't ever need a union if I could help it. I work really hard with my photography company and so far it seems my work has paid off. I suppose a union could be looked at as a glass half full or half empty. Depends on your perspective.
ReplyDeleteThe law was first put into place to protect the rights of the workers. The unions make sure they are getting paid appropriatly for the work they do and and safe in thier working environment. People might think unions are no longer necessary these days but that's not exactly true. Indiana also still has alot of factories and most of the those factories have unions to protect the workers. I don't think this bill is at all good for Indiana due to our factories and our need to keep our workers safe.
ReplyDeleteThe way I see it, the way things are now has been around for as long as i've worked. I've had 3 jobs, currently am working in one. I am used to it, and am very ok with the way things are.
ReplyDeleteI do disagree with the "right to work" law, working isn't a right, it's a privilege that many can abuse, such as doing a horrible job while working, and demanding fees for being fired. The reason we work is because we're right for the job, and if we get fired for not being the right person for the job, we shouldn't be in the job in the first place.
Unions were origonally designed to give people honest relations between employee and boss/company. Times have changed and the laws must change. I understand the meaning and purpose of a union, but it is misused by all. I'm sure many of you have heard stories of a lazy free loader bragging about only working twenty hours and got paid for forty. I don't mean to offend the hard working men and women, but things aren't working. The system is too expensive. I don't want an overhaul. I want it gone.
ReplyDelete