<blockquote>"They have long since served their purpose of creating acceptable working conditions."</blockquote>
...Which corporations are now doing their damnedest to roll back to the days of Dickens, in case you hadn't noticed.
If "independently bargaining" has enabled you to keep a roof over your head working just one job, you should count yourself very, very lucky.
Unions have never created a single job. They "may" help workers but often the are used to BAR ENTRY to the workforce by anyone not in the union. They have long since served their purpose of creating acceptable working conditions. Now they are leeches living off the backs of the workers and the tax payers.
It seems to me that if these laws pass in CA to prevent unions from forcing "speach" then they should also apply to stock held corporations. What is the difference if my dues are used to "speak" or if my profits are used to "speak"? In either case I should be able to refuse to have my money used to support a political candidate that I don't agree with. Ban it all or ban none of it. But don't treat one kind of "speach" differently than another.
Pages