An illustration of my earlier post regarding American vapidness....
EEE
location: Landscape Challenged Illinois
listening to: 16 Horsepower, black music from the 70's & and still going broke from Paste Magazine
registered: 2002.08.26
posts: 3227
[view all posts]
[view all posts]
How many have heard of the court case Harris v. Quinn? Regarding American workers - ALL worker, not just union workers - this case is set to be ruled upon on Monday by the US Supreme Court. While the American people have been following crap like some bachelorette claiming she had sex on camera during some reality tv show, Katie Couric's luxury wedding and other bullshit of no true meaning, they remain oblivious to this important court case. And this singular court case has threads that will impact EVERY worker, including those who are not union workers (how I suggest it impacts every worker is that by providing decent wages and benefits for union workers through collective bargaining, private sector employees are allowed to contrast their wages and benefits to allow for increases in their own wages and benefits when they lag behind union employees). Let's face it, the appearance of collective bargaining has benefited all workers over time. So, what is this case about? Basically it is about making those that benefit from collective bargaining pay for that collective bargaining. In other words, this is about people not wanting to pay their fair share, typically because they either are cheap or don't believe the philosophy of a union. The impact of this would be that unions could not obtain union dues from a member if the person did not want to pay them. That is it in a nutshell.
E
EEE
(view)
How many have heard of the court case Harris v. Quinn? Regarding American workers - ALL worker, not just union workers - this case is set to be ruled upon on Monday by the US Supreme Court. While the American people have been following crap like some bachelorette claiming she had sex on camera during some reality tv show, Katie Couric's luxury wedding and other bullshit of no true meaning, they remain oblivious to this important court case. And this singular court case has threads that will impact EVERY worker, including those who are not union workers (how I suggest it impacts every worker is that by providing decent wages and benefits for union workers through collective bargaining, private sector employees are allowed to contrast their wages and benefits to allow for increases in their own wages and benefits when they lag behind union employees). Let's face it, the appearance of collective bargaining has benefited all workers over time. So, what is this case about? Basically it is about making those that benefit from collective bargaining pay for that collective bargaining. In other words, this is about people not wanting to pay their fair share, typically because they either are cheap or don't believe the philosophy of a union. The impact of this would be that unions could not obtain union dues from a member if the person did not want to pay them. That is it in a nutshell.
