On August 7th, those of you who understand the gravity of your citizenship will go to the polls and cast an informed vote for the primary election candidates of your choice. You will also be confronted with Proposition A on the ballot. There are two things to remember when considering Prop A. The first is freedom, and the second is accountability. I believe a yes vote on Prop A is a vote for freedom and accountability.
Much of the information you may have seen on TV is at best misleading and often completely disingenuous. We needn’t rely on TV or social media advertisements to understand Prop A because 27 states have passed similar measures. In those states, union bosses have lost their power over individual workers, and the avalanche of ads opposing Prop A is because those union bosses are fighting back.
Senate Bill 19 gave workers the freedom to choose whether or not to join a union by forbidding employers from forcing union membership as a requirement for employment and forbidding that same employer from prohibiting an employee from joining a union. Through SB 19, I believe workers gained freedom and organized labor (unions) acquired accountability to their members. Nevertheless, the union power brokers contested the legislation and the courts issued a stay until after this August’s election. Whether or not you have learned about Prop A, the following information may be helpful.
What the Prop A Ballot Language Means:
A "yes" vote is to uphold SB 19, which would enact freedom-to-work so that no person can be required to pay dues to a labor union or join a labor union as a condition of employment.
A "no" vote is to overturn SB 19, and affected Missouri workers would continue to be forced to join a union or pay dues as a condition of employment even if they objected.
Why Voting “Yes” on Prop A is Important:
Reforming union laws in Missouri is pro-worker, pro-transparency and pro-taxpayer.
Allowing businesses the opportunity to create better jobs with growing incomes will lead to stronger economic growth.
Studies show that Right to Work states:
Have higher levels of economic growth;
Attract more new businesses; and
Have increased job and wage growth.
Missouri is losing jobs and population to our Right to Work neighboring states.
All of the states surrounding Missouri, with the exception of Illinois, have freed their workers from forced union membership.
The 22 states that passed freedom-to-work laws before 2012 have experienced an economic boom.
Freedom-to-work states had more than 17 percent average growth between 2004 and 2014 while states without freedom-to-work over the same period had only 11.5 percent growth.
The top states for new manufacturing jobs are freedom-to-work states, which also have substantially more private-sector job growth than forced-union states.
Freedom-to-work is the single biggest policy that can help protect a worker’s freedom to choose whether a union works for them or they work for the union.
Do your own research and then be sure to vote on August 7th. Once you have researched the differences, I think you will vote yes on Prop A and implement what the Legislature passed in 2017. Except for the intervention of the judiciary, freedom-to-work would have already been in place for nearly a year, and I believe Missouri would have begun gaining on some of our freedom-to-work neighbors
6 comments:
Ed Emery, if 27 states jumped off a bridge, does that mean we need to as well? Pitiful argument to punish workers by reducing their pay, all workers, not just the 10% employed by unions. Ed is a slimeball, piss on your leg and tell you it’s raining.
Hey Anonymous, punish workers? Reduce their pay? Prove it with data from the 27 states who have already "jumped off a bridge". I dare you.
@ Anonymous 3:59
Here is an article on the history of the right to work push. As you will note, if you are capable of comprehending the story, right to work is not being pushed by workers, it is pushed by business owners, Chamber of Commerce’s, and Republican politicians that owe their allegiance to big business. Workers formed unions after sweat shops, dangerous working conditions, and abuses by employers to set a decent wage and a 40 hour workweek. Although you don’t comprehend the history of labor in this country, but enjoy the benefits, makes you appear to deserve repeating the sweat shop days. If you want to believe that David Humphreys spent $10 million at making Missouri right to work, when he has no union employees, is not because he fears organized labor but for philanthropy then you are not working with a full deck. I expect you have been brainwashed by the GOP, Donald Trump, or you are unable to connect the dots due to a lack of grey matter, but it’s perfectly obvious by the opponents vs the proponents. If you like the right to work, take your butt to Arkansas, Kansas, or Oklahoma and let me know about your wages there, I dare you.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/04/24/the-right-to-work-really-means-the-right-to-work-for-less/
And... you couldn't follow a simple instruction. Figured as much. I read your Washington Post hit piece. Not a shred of data in it. Slobber and rant all you want, but I think you'll be disappointed on election day.
I don’t take instruction from someone without knowledge of the labor history of the United States or how their 40 hour week came to be. Anyone can read, comprehension seems to escape your grasp. A little more history for you, more than 90% of the time Missouri voters have been asked to vote on a law passed by lawmakers, they voted against it. It has been over 30 years since a law was suspended due to this referendum, so I kind of like the majority of intelligent voters odds.
Pass the law, it really does not matter. If the Membership finds out somebody is taking the benefits and not contribution dues, we will find a way to get rid of him in a hurry.
Post a Comment