![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/09\/union-thug-300x207.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The reason they are so angry is that Donald Trump\u2019s rise is yet another nail in the coffin of organized labor. (And the rake off from membership dues to the Democrat Party as well as the lifestyles of the…Union Leadership) Labor unions have been contracting, at least in the private sector, for decades. Recently, states began passing laws called \u201cRight to Work\u201d. These are laws that, basically, prevent forced unionization of workers.<\/p>\n
To further explain, if you want to work for a business that has a union in place, you are forced to join that union and pay vigorish<\/i><\/span> dues the union. Even if you don\u2019t join the union, you are still required to pay what are called \u201cAgency Fees.\u201d You don\u2019t have any choice in the matter. You don\u2019t pay, you don\u2019t work, period.<\/p>\n This led to calls to removes these special privileges from unions and end the closed shop system. When Wisconsin passed their right to work law, (Imperfect as it was), and ended mandatory paycheck collections of state workers and I believe private sector workers, as well as ending the closed shop system, union membership collapsed. Workers couldn\u2019t wait to bail out on the unions. If I recall correctly, several union locals closed due to lack of membership. (Only the union leadership remained) Now New Hampshire, the home of Anger Central, is poised to become the next state to tell Unions to \u201cSod off.\u201d Here are the details from NH1:<\/p>\n After long and heated hearing, right to work bill passes first hurdle. T<\/b>he full state Senate could vote as early as next week on a controversial right to work bill, NH1 News has learned. <\/b><\/p>\n On Tuesday, following a nearly five hour long state Senate Commerce Committee hearing that at times turned contentious, the measure passed 3-2 in a party line vote. <\/b><\/p>\n The panel\u2019s three Republicans, Sens. Andy Sanborn, Dan Innis and Harold French voted in favor of the measure, with Democratic Sens. Donna Soucy and Bette Lasky opposed.<\/b><\/p>\n This is generally the typical response to Right to Work bills. The Democrat Party has, for generations, been the recipient of hundreds of millions of dollars in \u201cPolitical Donations\u201d, (Read that as bribes). It didn\u2019t matter if the union member supported the Democrat Party or their candidates. The Union would take their money and give it to a candidate that the member didn\u2019t support.<\/p>\n As we saw in Wisconsin, when given the choice, the membership can\u2019t wait to \u201cBeat Feet\u201d for the nearest door and take their money with them.<\/p>\n The hearing was held in the state House of Representatives chamber and was packed with hundreds of union members opposed to the legislation, which would prohibit public and private sector unions from charging non-members fees for negotiating on their behalf.<\/b><\/p>\n Recently, during my job search, I interviewed at a place that had just unionized. I wasn\u2019t aware of this fact when I applied, and in all probability, I would have not applied had I known. It wasn\u2019t a great paying job in the first place, and the union would have raked off a few dollars from my paycheck, and there would have been nothing I could do about it. As for the union members who attended the hearing? They acted as union members usually do when they aren\u2019t going to get their way.<\/p>\n They loudly cheered many of those testifying against the bill, and at times jeered witnesses who supported the measure. Innis, the freshman senator chairing his first hearing, repeatedly called on those in attendance \u201cto please refrain from applause and other activities so we continue to move this forward.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n After he was immediately booed, he instantly added \u201cincluding booing.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n Proponents of the bill, which would make New Hampshire the first right to work state in New England, said it would give the Granite State a competitive advantage over its neighbors in the fight for attracting new companies.<\/p>\n \u201cThis bill will help NH attract businesses and promote itself as a good place to do business. No other state in New England has such a law so the law would unquestionably allow us in New Hampshire to distinguish itself from our local neighbors,\u201d argued Tom Sullivan, vice president of Ruger Firearms operation in Newport. <\/b><\/p>\n Sullivan also testified that the firearms manufacture decided against adding a new plant in New Hampshire because the state didn\u2019t have a right to work law. <\/b><\/p>\n There are two major firearms manufacturers in New Hampshire. Sturm Ruger and Sig Sauer. (I own some stock in Sturm Ruger) I would assume both of the plants are unionized. I also know that Ruger has another plant in Prescott, Arizona, and I would not be at all surprised that it isn\u2019t unionized.<\/p>\n Other sponsors of the measure contested that workers shouldn\u2019t be forced to pay dues to get a job.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cI support this legislation for liberty, ok, for liberty reasons, because I believe that no person in this state should be forced to take a dime out of their pocket to get a job,\u201d Republican state Rep. Al Baldsaro said. <\/b><\/p>\n Larry Preston, the owner of a small business that repairs appliances, argued that \u201cwhat this state needs is more workers, not business. At the (state) unemployment rate at 2.7%, many of us are struggling to find workers.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cWe need an environment that encourages more workers to move to New Hampshire, not employers. Let\u2019s be honest, this bill does nothing in that regard,\u201d he added. <\/b><\/p>\n Preston then charged that \u201cthis bill is designed to hurt, hinder, and kill unions.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n First, that 2.7% unemployment rate is garbage. I\u2019ve been trying to find a job in my field for over a year, both in New Hampshire and Massachusetts. Second, yes, it will hurt unions as they are currently configured. Unions have been getting special protections and privileges from the State and Federal Governments since at least the Roosevelt Administration. They do not have to compete, and can essentially blackmail a company into giving them what they want, under threat of being shut down. The bill, as well as all the Right to Work laws now on the books doesn\u2019t ban unions, it forces them to compete. Unions are monopolies and competition is something they hate. (Because they usually lose)<\/p>\n Bob Jones, a union leader from Derry, said \u201cthis bill does nothing more than insert government where it isn\u2019t needed: the employer-employee negotiations.\u201d And he added that \u201cstudy after study shown that these laws depress wages and reduce benefits for all workers regardless of whether or not they have a union.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n Others who opposed the measure said that workers should pay for benefits they gain through collective bargaining and that the right to work bill would weaken union finances, which would the push for fair working conditions and wages. <\/b><\/p>\n You will notice that it never enters their empty heads that perhaps the worker would prefer to negotiate their own pay and benefits? They might prefer more money to vacation time for instance, or the reverse. Oh wait, according to the Unions, people are to stupid to negotiate their own compensation.<\/p>\n In the past, when Right to Work bills were passed and sent to the governor for his or her signature, they would be vetoed. This was due to the sitting governor to be a Democrat in the pay of the unions. Well, a funny thing happened last November.<\/p>\n Over the past decade similar bills failed to pass in both chambers. In 2011, a right to work bill did make it to the Corner Office, but was vetoed by Democratic Gov. John Lynch.<\/strong><\/p>\n Gee thanks. Glad to see you earned your bribes<\/i><\/span> campaign contributions.<\/p>\n But Chris Sununu, the first Republican governor in a dozen years, says he\u2019ll sign such a bill.<\/b><\/p>\n Sununu campaigned in favor of the legislation in his election last year and in his inaugural address last week he said \u201cwe are going to give employees once and for all the flexibility they deserve in the workforce by passing right to work. Let\u2019s tell these companies that New Hampshire is open for business.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n As of now, the majority of states are Right to Work, and the list is growing.<\/p>\n This past weekend Kentucky became the 27<\/b>th<\/b><\/sup> state to adopt right to work legislation.<\/b><\/p>\n The day of the union is coming to an end. With very few exceptions, they are not only no longer needed, they are actually being seen as hurting the people they claim to be representing. For instance, the United Mine Workers have supported Democrats forever. They backed Barack Obama twice. What did that support get them? Thousands of their members out of a job as their candidate decided to destroy their industry because it was icky.<\/p>\n This time, the miners, along with union members across the nation opposed their leadership and voted for Donald Trump. They have gotten tired of being sold down the river by their own out of touch leadership. It will be interesting to see if the UMWA gets the boot from it\u2019s members in the next few years. As for New Hampshire? I can\u2019t wait to see this bill become law.<\/p>\n Thatisall<\/p>\n ~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n [yasr_visitor_votes size=”large”]<\/p>\n Save<\/span><\/p>\n Save<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Good day all. We are but 4 short days away from the end of the Great Mistake and the inauguration of President Donald J. Trump. Among those who are enraged over this, (And it sucks to be them), are all the \u201cBig Labor\u201d Union leaders. Continue reading <\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n