Comments for The National Right to Work Committee®

Comment on Right to Work Is ‘About Giving People Choice’ by VicHentz

VicHentz — Tue, 07 May 2013 01:02:49 +0000

One can only hope and pray that PA becomes a RTW state AND they get rid of that “prevailing wage” b.s. at the same time. It took us over ten years to get a new small bridge on our dirt road because the estimated cost was inflated a little over 5 fold by the “prevailing wage” laws. The township fathers finally lucked out and got a couple of grants to make up the $217,000 difference between the real world cost and the union world cost for the project!

Comment on Michigan Takes a Major Step Along the ‘Path to Prosperity’ by VicHentz

VicHentz — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 20:06:32 +0000

Simply amazing that RTW is now the law of the land in Michigan! AND that the Michigan Governor survived a recall in a state formally owned by the UAW!

Times they are a changing.

Comment on 2013 National Right To Work Act by tom burr

tom burr — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 17:42:13 +0000

I am so worried of Unions that demand THEIR??? rights to hamstring our leaders to gain only their American Greed which is alive and well. Our open country has been used time and time again to sneak around the corner to get their power. In Germany it was the NAZISM”S now it’s the same attitude that invades our very lives. Our constitution must be brought to bear to put a stop of this invasion of our rights as citizens. This is a CANCER which must be attended to, NOW, NOW.

Comment on Ala. Senate votes to strengthen Right To Work law by VicHentz

VicHentz — Sun, 10 Mar 2013 15:57:00 +0000

We desperately need this at the national level, or at the very least Federal language that eliminates payroll deduction of union dues. Why should your employer have the payroll expense of doing the union’s job i.e. :collecting dues? As long as the rank and file have the option, they will ALWAYS mail in that union dues check, right? RIGHT!

Oh, 65, retired, worked for 14 companies in my lifetime, about 70% of them forced union (didn’t have a choice, the unions were entrenched when I got hired) all but one (the U.S. Post Office) of the union companies are now gone forever ,and I would have willingly and gladly stiffed the totally worthless unions, if dues had been voluntary, from payday one.

Comment on If unions do so much for members, why bully? by Jakre

Jakre — Fri, 08 Mar 2013 17:12:24 +0000

Was it something I said?

Comment on Teacher Union Bosses and Big Labor Governor Push For Massive Tax Hike on Middle Class in Massachusetts by Union Briefs for Thurs., March 7, 2013: NLRB Smackdowns, Alinsky & Mud Slinging… | Irascible Musings

Fri, 08 Mar 2013 07:55:33 +0000

[...] Massachusetts Union Bosses Push $1.9 Billion Income Tax Hike On Bay State Residents [...]

Comment on Teacher Union Bosses and Big Labor Governor Push For Massive Tax Hike on Middle Class in Massachusetts by VicHentz

VicHentz — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:41:56 +0000

The big union parasite killed the host long ago as far as the American private sector goes. It would be amusing (if it were not so tragic,)that the parasite thinks that the public sector host can never die, that the taxpayer’s pockets are bottomless. Here in my state, the public service unions live high off the hog on the property tax, with the assumption that the homeowner will eat dog food before they default on their property taxes and lose their homes. The four
homes on my road which were abandoned by the owners because they could no longer afford the union’s property tax extortion, two of which I know personally were
free and clear, no mortgage, are testimony to that fallacy. Taxpayers here are starting to say NO to unions. With their feet!

Comment on Steve King Introduces National Right to Work Act to End Forced Union Dues for Workers by Steve King Introduces National Right to Work Act to End Forced Union Dues for Workers

Wed, 06 Mar 2013 14:43:27 +0000

[...] http://nrtwc.org/steve-king-introduces [...]

Comment on Union Boss: Losing WI Forced-Dues Privileges ‘Makes Huge Difference’ by james cullen

james cullen — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:56:03 +0000

Proof that right to work saves jobs! Its just that freaking simple. While Obama mouths the stupid cliche: “right to work for less”, these Wisconsin employees not only held on to their jobs but actually take home more money by not having to pay shake down dues to thug unions.

Comment on Union Boss: Losing WI Forced-Dues Privileges ‘Makes Huge Difference’ by VicHentz

VicHentz — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 01:17:29 +0000

I believe that if we went to “right to work” nationwide, via a Federal law, the ranks of the public ‘service’ unions would be decimated. The suffering union rank and file KNOW that their union dues just go to keep their UNION’S bosses and their UNION’S employees in gravy, while the rank and file get the scraps, if any! Friends of mine, in the local teachers union, found out the hard way just how worthless their union dues were when it came to recent school district downsizing in preparation for next years budget. Nobody’s putting a gun to anyone’s head when you go from 2000 dues payers, down to 600, once it is no longer mandatory. There’s got to be another reason. I wonder what it was? Obviously, the union’s high regard for itself was not shared by the majority of the rank and file WHEN they had the chance to express themselves by withholding union dues without being penalized OR FIRED!

Comment on Missouri Dems Seek to Make Right to Work Advocacy a Felony by Jim Yardley

Jim Yardley — Sat, 02 Mar 2013 17:42:37 +0000

Simply the fact that anyone, much less an elected official, would entertain such an idea for more than a split second is a demonstrable display of why not only the legislators who bought in to this themselves, but those who voted for these fools should be ridiculed on a daily basis, even after they “apologize” or “evolve” or “reconsider their positions.” If they came up with this stupidity once, they will just do it again and again and again. Make there constituents a target of ridicule as well.

Comment on Union Rules Prevent NYC from Firing Stalking Teacher by VicHentz

VicHentz — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 15:48:02 +0000

Teachers in my district recently found out how useless their union was. Because of declining enrollment, the school board had to cut 30-40 positions. but “worked with” (that’s: bowed to) the teachers union and got the lay-offs down to 15-20. Some really good teachers, some with 30+ years, got the ax.

Usually, the school board’s position is :”You have a teaching degree, so teach! Here’s the lesson plan” as they would tell a math teacher to teach history because a history teacher couldn’t be found, or a chemistry teacher to teach biology, and so on. The school board used the union’s district wide “seniority” angle to do the switching around with nary a peep from the union because it kept the union rank and file with a dues paying job which kept the union bosses in a paycheck.

When it came to layoff’s however, district wide seniority went out the window in favor of “structured” or “layered” layoffs. You know, only a math teacher can bump a math teacher, music bumps music, etc., and then only in the same school building, not district wide. When the teachers tried to file grievances, they were told “OH, that part of the (formally district wide) seniority was changed”

“When did we vote on that they asked?”

Union reply “You didn’t, that was privately (that’s unannounced) negotiated by the union (bigwigs) and the school board. Its in your contract that we can do that in an emergency(?), Oh, but for your benefit of course !”

When a teacher with 30 years is layed-off from a school district in this union state, they are pretty much doomed. Any school district (with a union) that hired them would have to start them at their 30 year union salary. But!, the new school board would not be REQUIRED to hire them since that teacher would have NO seniority in that district’s local and the school board would usually opt for a much younger qualified applicant who could be payed a lot less. Only if the layed-off teacher was called back by their original district would they return to their original salary ranking.

Imagine paying all that dues money all those years for nothing! That’s got to sting!

Comment on Missouri Dems Seek to Make Right to Work Advocacy a Felony by Raymond J. LaJeunesse, Jr.

Raymond J. LaJeunesse, Jr. — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:15:31 +0000

This bill would easily be struck down as violating the First Amendment.

Comment on Missouri Dems Seek to Make Right to Work Advocacy a Felony by Roy Frank

Roy Frank — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:44:45 +0000

This is where that fat little Hitler mustachioed Trumpka would like to go, marxism!

Comment on Missouri Dems Seek to Make Right to Work Advocacy a Felony by Doug

Doug — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:38:06 +0000

This is why we must end public unions at once and for all.

Comment on NLRB Pays Union Officials $768,465 to work for the Union by » NLRB Pays Union Officials $768465 to work for the Union

» NLRB Pays Union Officials $768465 to work for the Union — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 02:35:18 +0000

[...] NLRB Pays Union Officials $768465 to work for the Union Go to this article [...]

Comment on U.S. House Committee Hearing Exposes Weakness of Obama NLRB Appointee Argument by Video: Trey Gowdy Shreds White House Big Labor Lawyer’s Talking Points | Nice Deb

Fri, 22 Feb 2013 03:13:33 +0000

[...] The National Right to Work Committee recommends watching the entire hearing, reporting that the hearing room was “the scene of the decimation Obama’s argument for making unconstitutional National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) appointments and the complete discrediting of the Big Labor lawyer who was there to shill for the White House and Democrats on the Committee.” [...]

Comment on NLRB Pays Union Officials $768,465 to work for the Union by ObamaNation: At least $177 Million In Tax Dollars Paid For Federal Workers To Do Union Business | Irascible Musings

Thu, 21 Feb 2013 23:08:20 +0000

[...] “In many cases, ‘official time’ is no more than taxpayer-funded no-show jobs.” stated the National Right to Work Committee’s on its website. [...]

Comment on NC Court Green Lights Big Labor, Okays Violating Workers’ Privacy by Roy

Roy — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 07:04:09 +0000

My concern is in reguards to Obamas comment about building hie local army. I appears he is going about it quite methodicly. He’s released several general and appointed numerous czars.He is trying to confiscate our firearms / At the same time the govt is buying up all the ammubition/ Part of this gun grab is to exempt govt enployees from gun regulations, law enforcment DOJ< ATF&E, SSA,Homeland security. They just bought up to 7000 personal defence weapons with full auto capability and 1.7 billion rounds os ammo.Why is he ttying to disarm us and at the same time build up and arm his own special force. and when obama buys his force full auto AR15's they are called personal defence weapons (PDW) When you or I buy one it's an assault wepon. And what is wosial security going to do with all those expencive hollow point bullets?That 1.7 billion rounds is enough bullets to shoot each american 5 times.

Comment on 'I Was Concerned That If They Pushed a Little Harder, My Head Would Be Crushed' by SovereignMary

SovereignMary — Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:26:02 +0000

My father was a union organizer in the 1940′s and 50′s. As a specialized Die Sinker – he lost many a job in his attempts to organize the shops in Detroit for decent wages and hours. But, what happened down the line with the union’s would be called nothing but union greed with bloated demands for paid, lengthy time off, coverage of attorney’s fee’s, businesses required to have a gross and obscene amount of paper trail before a miscreant union employee who was a detriment to his/her fellow workers could be fired. Last, but not least and before everything hit the financial wall was the ridiculous and ludicrous proposal in the union auto shops to have company covered medical pet care insurance for union employees.
People should have the individual right and choice to decide whether or not they wish to belong to a union and not be forced to join one in order to garner employment.
Unions have caused costly insanity in the work place when someone working in an office could not hang a picture, move a desk or chair without first having to call in a union janitor to do the deed. Pathetic and moronic.
In the schools and as a parent volunteer with the PTO I witnessed union school janitors during their working hours threaten the parent volunteers to abstain and refuse with helping move tables, etc., during a fund raisers for the school children’s benefit because the parent’s found out that they could no longer legally give the union workers a little financial extra in their pockets from what was garnered from the fund raising. The attitude from these union janitors was that we the volunteer parents owed them – whether or not we would be breaking the laws to grant their cry-baby wants!
Never mind the fact that the fund raisers were to pay for microscopes and other equipment greatly needed for the children’s benefit and education.