A $45 monthly fee could end up costing big labor billions. Public
unions are getting nervous, while those who dont like how they operate
are claiming the free lunch may be over soon.

An explosive case regarding government employees and the First
Amendment that the Supreme Court will hear on Feb. 26 could redefine
the relationship between public unions and workers.

Petitioner Mark Janus works at the Illinois Department of Healthcare
and Family Services and didnt like that a certain amount was deducted
from his paycheck €” he didnt believe he should be forced to pay union
dues or fees just to be allowed to work for the state. He didnt agree
with the 1.3 million-member AFSCME unions politics, and so believed,
under the First Amendment, he couldnt be forced to contribute.

In his court filing, Janus quotes Thomas Jefferson, who said to €œcompel
a man to furnish contribution of money for the propagation of opinions
which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical.€�


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...to-decide.html

--
"A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man; a debt
he proposes to pay off with your money." ~ G Gordon Liddy

badgolferman wrote:

A $45 monthly fee could end up costing big labor billions. Public
unions are getting nervous, while those who dont like how they
operate are claiming the free lunch may be over soon.

An explosive case regarding government employees and the First
Amendment that the Supreme Court will hear on Feb. 26 could redefine
the relationship between public unions and workers.

Petitioner Mark Janus works at the Illinois Department of Healthcare
and Family Services and didnt like that a certain amount was deducted
from his paycheck €” he didnt believe he should be forced to pay union
dues or fees just to be allowed to work for the state. He didnt agree
with the 1.3 million-member AFSCME unions politics, and so believed,
under the First Amendment, he couldnt be forced to contribute.

In his court filing, Janus quotes Thomas Jefferson, who said to
€œcompel a man to furnish contribution of money for the propagation of
opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical.€�


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...to-decide.html


Sorry, wrong group.

On Friday, February 9, 2018 at 12:08:04 PM UTC-5, badgolferman wrote:
badgolferman wrote:

A $45 monthly fee could end up costing big labor billions. Public
unions are getting nervous, while those who dont like how they
operate are claiming the free lunch may be over soon.

An explosive case regarding government employees and the First
Amendment that the Supreme Court will hear on Feb. 26 could redefine
the relationship between public unions and workers.

Petitioner Mark Janus works at the Illinois Department of Healthcare
and Family Services and didnt like that a certain amount was deducted
from his paycheck €” he didnt believe he should be forced to pay union
dues or fees just to be allowed to work for the state. He didnt agree
with the 1.3 million-member AFSCME unions politics, and so believed,
under the First Amendment, he couldnt be forced to contribute.

In his court filing, Janus quotes Thomas Jefferson, who said to
€œcompel a man to furnish contribution of money for the propagation of
opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical.€�


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...to-decide.html


Sorry, wrong group.

No problem, I found it interesting. Thanks for posting.

On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 17:08:00 +0000 (UTC), "badgolferman"
wrote:

badgolferman wrote:

A $45 monthly fee could end up costing big labor billions. Public
unions are getting nervous, while those who don’t like how they
operate are claiming the free lunch may be over soon.

An explosive case regarding government employees and the First
Amendment that the Supreme Court will hear on Feb. 26 could redefine
the relationship between public unions and workers.

Petitioner Mark Janus works at the Illinois Department of Healthcare
and Family Services and didn’t like that a certain amount was deducted
from his paycheck — he didn’t believe he should be forced to pay union
dues or fees just to be allowed to work for the state. He didn’t agree
with the 1.3 million-member AFSCME union’s politics, and so believed,
under the First Amendment, he couldn’t be forced to contribute.

In his court filing, Janus quotes Thomas Jefferson, who said to
“compel a man to furnish contribution of money for the propagation of
opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical.”


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...to-decide.html


Sorry, wrong group.

No worry. The subject has more meat on the bone than most threads now
days. I carried my health insurance into retirement. It ****es me
I'm compelled to pay a yearly "union does" of $25 just to have Mail
Handlers insurance.

When new prospective public service employees are hired, the Union is
like vultures on a dead cow. Sign this, join the union.... Spit.

Bet a nickel SCOTUS comes down 5-4 against "compulsory".

On 2/9/2018 2:34 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 17:08:00 +0000 (UTC), "badgolferman"
wrote:

badgolferman wrote:

A $45 monthly fee could end up costing big labor billions. Public
unions are getting nervous, while those who dont like how they
operate are claiming the free lunch may be over soon.

An explosive case regarding government employees and the First
Amendment that the Supreme Court will hear on Feb. 26 could redefine
the relationship between public unions and workers.

Petitioner Mark Janus works at the Illinois Department of Healthcare
and Family Services and didnt like that a certain amount was deducted
from his paycheck €” he didnt believe he should be forced to pay union
dues or fees just to be allowed to work for the state. He didnt agree
with the 1.3 million-member AFSCME unions politics, and so believed,
under the First Amendment, he couldnt be forced to contribute.

In his court filing, Janus quotes Thomas Jefferson, who said to
€œcompel a man to furnish contribution of money for the propagation of
opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical.€�


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...to-decide.html


Sorry, wrong group.

No worry. The subject has more meat on the bone than most threads now
days. I carried my health insurance into retirement. It ****es me
I'm compelled to pay a yearly "union does" of $25 just to have Mail
Handlers insurance.

When new prospective public service employees are hired, the Union is
like vultures on a dead cow. Sign this, join the union.... Spit.

Bet a nickel SCOTUS comes down 5-4 against "compulsory".

I'm generally anti-union but know they have done some good stuff in the
private sector.

Totally against public unions. Who are they organized against? The
public, that's who.

Bet a nickel SCOTUS comes down 5-4 against "compulsory".

I'm generally anti-union but know they have done some good stuff in the
private sector. Totally against public unions. Who are they organized against?
The public, that's who.


I've known a couple people who - for legitimate religious reasons -
were able to opt-out of paying compulsory dues to the Union.
They still had to pay - but it went to the charity of their choice.
... not a bad compromise, under our labour laws.
John T.

On 2/9/2018 2:39 PM, Frank wrote:



I'm generally anti-union but know they have done some good stuff in the
private sector.

Totally against public unions.Â* Who are they organized against?Â* The
public, that's who.

Its not 1930 any more. If it was, I'd be a union organizer as they were
needed back then and did a lot of good. By 1960 they became a drain on
society taking money from members and protecting lazy workers. I have
many stories from union negotiations.

I'd never join one and have them hold me back. I'll do my own negotiating.

On 2/9/18 9:39 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 2/9/2018 2:39 PM, Frank wrote:



I'm generally anti-union but know they have done some good stuff in
the private sector.

Totally against public unions.Â* Who are they organized against?Â* The
public, that's who.

Its not 1930 any more.Â* If it was, I'd be a union organizer as they were
needed back then and did a lot of good.Â* By 1960 they became a drain on
society taking money from members and protecting lazy workers.Â* I have
many stories from union negotiations.

I'd never join one and have them hold me back.Â* I'll do my own negotiating.

As for company vs. union employee loyalty, I advise my corporate clients
to periodically tell their employees to closely inspect their paycheck.
They will note that it's issued by the company, not by the union.

--
If your adult child needs a safe space to avoid offensive words, you've
failed as a parent.
- @Jenn_Abrams

badgolferman posted for all of us...



badgolferman wrote:

A $45 monthly fee could end up costing big labor billions. Public
unions are getting nervous, while those who don?t like how they
operate are claiming the free lunch may be over soon.

An explosive case regarding government employees and the First
Amendment that the Supreme Court will hear on Feb. 26 could redefine
the relationship between public unions and workers.

Petitioner Mark Janus works at the Illinois Department of Healthcare
and Family Services and didn?t like that a certain amount was deducted
from his paycheck ? he didn?t believe he should be forced to pay union
dues or fees just to be allowed to work for the state. He didn?t agree
with the 1.3 million-member AFSCME union?s politics, and so believed,
under the First Amendment, he couldn?t be forced to contribute.

In his court filing, Janus quotes Thomas Jefferson, who said to
?compel a man to furnish contribution of money for the propagation of
opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical.?


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...to-decide.html


Sorry, wrong group.

Hey where are the monthly statistics?

--
Tekkie

badgolferman posted for all of us...



A $45 monthly fee could end up costing big labor billions. Public
unions are getting nervous, while those who don?t like how they operate
are claiming the free lunch may be over soon.

An explosive case regarding government employees and the First
Amendment that the Supreme Court will hear on Feb. 26 could redefine
the relationship between public unions and workers.

Petitioner Mark Janus works at the Illinois Department of Healthcare
and Family Services and didn?t like that a certain amount was deducted
from his paycheck ? he didn?t believe he should be forced to pay union
dues or fees just to be allowed to work for the state. He didn?t agree
with the 1.3 million-member AFSCME union?s politics, and so believed,
under the First Amendment, he couldn?t be forced to contribute.

In his court filing, Janus quotes Thomas Jefferson, who said to ?compel
a man to furnish contribution of money for the propagation of opinions
which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical.?


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...to-decide.html

When I worked at a school district if the teachers didn't join the union
then they were forced to pay a percentage of the dues; which went to the
union. I forget what they called it... I only had to cross the picket lines
a couple of times but the teachers liked me so they never messed with me.

--
Tekkie

On 2/9/2018 12:58 PM, BurfordTJustice wrote:
Not in the last 50 years..

They are all money laundry operatons for democrats now.



Probably true for the big unions. I'm thinking of little guys like
brick layers and plumbers that were helped by their union.

Unions are largely unnecessary today because of labor laws like those
that require overtime for work week over 40 hours.

On 2/10/2018 7:09 AM, Wade Garrett wrote:
On 2/9/18 9:39 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 2/9/2018 2:39 PM, Frank wrote:



I'm generally anti-union but know they have done some good stuff in
the private sector.

Totally against public unions.Â* Who are they organized against?Â* The
public, that's who.

Its not 1930 any more.Â* If it was, I'd be a union organizer as they
were needed back then and did a lot of good.Â* By 1960 they became a
drain on society taking money from members and protecting lazy
workers.Â* I have many stories from union negotiations.

I'd never join one and have them hold me back.Â* I'll do my own
negotiating.

As for company vs. union employee loyalty, I advise my corporate clients
to periodically tell their employees to closely inspect their paycheck.
They will note that it's issued by the company, not by the union.


Many years ago when I was an exempt staff member I was appointed to a
site committee to aid in educating workers on the business. The HR head
of this committee said the best thing was the threat of the union that
caused this action and the second best thing was non-exempts rejecting
the union.

Big company had many plant unions but union workers were no better off
than non-union.