Forced? Details, please!
Forced? Details, please!
I do not support laws like this. Period... 
Back in the day when I worked as a semi-driver, union membership was mandatory. I had no choice. Either join or find another job. I eventually found another job because we had to park our trucks during the truckers strike in 79.
Oh, so you weren't "forced", you had the option of finding another employer.
That sounds a little like some of the comments from anti-union guys saying, "don't like your working conditions?, get another job!"
That sounds a little like some of the comments from anti-union guys saying, "don't like your working conditions?, get another job!"
So yes, I was forced to join the union or have my family go with out food and shelter. You have an issue with that?
At the time it was the highest paying job in the area. You have an issue with me doing what I could to support my family in the best way possible?
When they went on strike, the income stopped. I was forced to find other employment to keep food on the table.
I have no issue at all. Just find it interesting how "forced" is used, depending on which side you're on.
"I want more pay" - "quit, and find another job, no one's forcing you to work there!"
"I was forced to join the union" - or, I'd have to find another job.....
"I want more pay" - "quit, and find another job, no one's forcing you to work there!"
"I was forced to join the union" - or, I'd have to find another job.....
It sure seems you have an issue. What part of your forced to join a union to get a high paying job are you having difficulty understanding?
I didn't like being a member of the teamsters union, but its called suck it up buttercup and go to work.
No issue, I've been on both sides of that coin. I just find it amusing that the same verbage is inappropriately used in one situation, and not the other. Don't git yer union card twisted up over nothing.....
You know, I just finished a 20 page paper over the differences (with respect to the 4th and 5th amendments) between military and civilian law. One of the points I addressed is that certain civilian public servants, like police and elected officials, need to be held to possess a "reduced expectation of privacy" in comparison to John Q. Public just like soldiers, sailors, and airmen do.
I'm all for holding public servants accountable. Can you imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth if they could be randomly searched without a warrant via inspection to maintain "good order and discipline?"
Similar threads
