So, basically, you're saying if we call something a right long enough, it is one? That goes back to my suggestion there are people that have called the United States a democracy for so long that it is one.
Neither is true.
Should the ability to legally operate a motor vehicle be thought of as a right or a privilege? How about to walk on a public sidewalk?
Anyways, this is more mental masturbation than anything. The collective bargaining 'right' of public employees in Wisconsin was granted by state law and has now been removed as it pertains to non-salary compensation.
If it can be removed so easily, it's not much of a "right," now is it?
So could driving and walking "rights."
The only difference is that while those privileges apply to virtually all, the bargaining rights apply to a smaller class, and pit the interests of that group against the public.
Anyways, there are plenty of rights created by state laws.
I've never claimed you had a right to drive or walk -- except on your own property.
Apparently even Walker and the GOP majority in the WI legislature are content to leave such rights for pedagogue salaries and fully for policemen and firefighters.
I don't care if you did or didn't. Any guess as to how a move to remove those 'privileges' would play out in any state, say, for example, the commie stronghold of Texas?
Happens all the time. Licenses are suspended or revoked; , you can't even get one until you're of a certain age. Drunk pedestrians are hauled off to jail; Trespassers are cited or arrested and then removed from the premises on which they're trespassing.
While you have the right to freely move, you don't have a right to do it in any manner you choose or wherever you choose. You must qualify for the privilege to drive or to walk about...other than on your own property.
Fine, the privilege to drive or walk in what would othrwise be a responsible, legal manner, save for a seismic change in the legal definition.
So, if the state of Texas suddenly passed a law stating that only Republicans would be given driver's licenses, that would then be kosher?
Still waiting for Yoni to express why the freedom to associate with others doesn't apply to bargaining freely.
Would it not also apply to the freedom to stand outside on your own property and jack off for everyone to see?
No; I think that's remedied in the fourteenth amendment's equal protection clause.So, if the state of Texas suddenly passed a law stating that only Republicans would be given driver's licenses, that would then be kosher?
And, in reading the fourteenth amendment, it is illuminating to see how they treat life, liberty, and property (the only rights there are) separately from privileges and immunities.
No, because your act isn't confined to your property but, visible from others' properties and, therefore, could be considered to harm others.
But a man's home is his castle and his rod is his staff, as it were.
Because bargaining requires the assent of all parties and, if one party (in the case of Wisconsin, the government) decides it doesn't want to bargain, you don't bargain.
You're still free to associate and talk about collective bargaining all you want but, unless all parties (required for collective bargaining to take place) are present and agree to bargain, you can't bargain. If it were a right, the government would be compelled to recognize that right.
And, if his home, rod, and staff aren't visible from anyone else's property, he's free to jack off in the front yard all he wants. In fact, if he has the consent of all his neighbors and persons who could possibly see him, he could do it.
Is not a private employer compelled to recognize that right?
What right? Collective bargaining?
No.
Oh really?
If the employees of a private company organize and form a union (or join an existing union), there's no obligation for the employer to recognize that organization or bargain with them, collectively.
They can refuse and all you have is an organization of employees.
That said, the employer must recognize the potential for the organization to strike and be prepared to either deal with them or fire them and start over.
So the employer has to cease to exist to avoid recognizing that right, according to you, which would mean any employer that continues to exist whose employees organized must recognize the right.
No. Any employer who enters into a contract with an employee organization has a legal obligation to adhere to that contract.
And, the employer doesn't have to cease to exist in order to avoid organized labor. Many unions are busted by employers who refuse to recognize them. Other employers give their employees an ultimatum and fire those that (obviously think like you do) believe they have a right to unionization. But, also, there are employers who enter into contracts with unions and are bound by law to the agreements into which they enter.
There are fewer of those in the private section (and the number is shrinking) and, because of the ease of corrupting elected officials (such as Wisconsin Democrats), unions in the public sector are growing.
Here's some interesting statistics from the Department of Labor:
If collective bargaining were a right, there'd be more than 6.9% of private employees unionized and demanding that right.In 2010, the union membership rate--the percent of wage and salary workers who were
members of a union--was 11.9 percent, down from 12.3 percent a year earlier, the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The number of wage and salary workers be-
longing to unions declined by 612,000 to 14.7 million. In 1983, the first year for
which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 per-
cent, and there were 17.7 million union workers.
The data on union membership were collected as part of the Current Population Sur-
vey (CPS), a monthly sample survey of about 60,000 households that obtains informa-
tion on employment and unemployment among the nation's civilian nonins utional
population age 16 and over. For more information see the Technical Note.
Highlights from the 2010 data:
--The union membership rate for public sector workers (36.2 percent) was
substantially higher than the rate for private sector workers (6.9 percent).
(See table 3.)
--Workers in education, training, and library occupations had the highest
unionization rate at 37.1 percent. (See table 3.)
--Black workers were more likely to be union members than were white, Asian,
or Hispanic workers. (See table 1.)
--Among states, New York had the highest union membership rate (24.2 percent)
and North Carolina had the lowest rate (3.2 percent). (See table 5.)
If an employer tries to interfere with organizing, especially through termination, the NLRB will get involved and the employer will find itself the subject of a lawsuit for violating their employees' right to organize.
If the law was as you seem to think it is, there'd be no private sector unions, so thanks for pointing out that there are.
It's astounding how tenaciously yoni clings to his stupid position.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
