Anonymous wrote:]Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:28 of the 50 states are "right to work" states.
Missouri just joined the trend. Why hasn't Maryland protected worker's rights?
For the same reason that MD has outlawed all charter schools.
Politicians serve unions, not citizens.
That's not true. PG has charters.
]Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:28 of the 50 states are "right to work" states.
Missouri just joined the trend. Why hasn't Maryland protected worker's rights?
For the same reason that MD has outlawed all charter schools.
Politicians serve unions, not citizens.
Anonymous wrote:Oh and if unions are so great, then why are people forced to join them?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Right to work gives employees the choice whether or not to join a union. Shouldn't everyone be free to join a union and more importantly to pay union dues only if they freely choose to?
+1
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Probably because right to work is the opposite of worker's rights.
That is not true.
Every right to organize and collectively bargain exists and is preserved in right to work states.
wrong.
Anonymous wrote:Right to work gives employees the choice whether or not to join a union. Shouldn't everyone be free to join a union and more importantly to pay union dues only if they freely choose to?
Anonymous wrote:28 of the 50 states are "right to work" states.
Missouri just joined the trend. Why hasn't Maryland protected worker's rights?
Anonymous wrote:Let's see... If you work in a right-to-work (RTW) state, as an employee, you will
Earn 3.2% less than if you didn't.
Pay 2.6% more for insurance benefits
Receive 4.8% less in pension benefits
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Probably because right to work is the opposite of worker's rights.
That is not true.
Every right to organize and collectively bargain exists and is preserved in right to work states.
Anonymous wrote:28 of the 50 states are "right to work" states.
Missouri just joined the trend. Why hasn't Maryland protected worker's rights?