ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, September 19, 1996 TAG: 9609190016
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A11 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: RICHARD E. JESKEY
WHY IS a law called one thing when it actually means another? Could it be because this deception insures the law's passage? Would you vote against the right to employment?
A good example is the so-called Right to Work Law. Does it give any new rights for individuals to obtain employment? No. Are economic protections guaranteed to workers in this law? No. It would seem that the only ones to benefit from such a law would be free-loaders and deadbeats. But why such a law?
To put the concept into perspective: Under current law, employees are given the right to organize, and this makes the boss very unhappy. The only time this happens, however, is when employees voice a dissatisfaction with the way their employers treat them. The organizing attempt takes a lot of time and costs plenty of money.
If the organizing attempt is successful, officers are elected by the union and these officers may be voted out if the membership is dissatisfied with their performance. The process minimizes the effects of a corporate dictatorship and creates a democracy, nonexistent in most non-union companies.
One day I posed a scenario to a politician, an attorney: If you represented 10 individuals in a class-action lawsuit and won $10,000, should you receive your commission of $250 from each of them? He replied, certainly. I asked, but what if one decided he didn't want to pay? The politician said that all are required to pay their fair share!
However, this same politician thinks unions should not have the same right because of the Right to Work Law, a law he supports. He thinks that when workers refuse to pay union dues, they should have the rights to benefits and wages won by the union.
Years ago, politicians controlled by corporate America were manipulative enough to figure a method that would eliminate the unions' restraint over their dictatorial ways, or at least impede the union movement. They devised a law professing the right to work, fooling unsuspecting citizens into supporting what they assumed was a law insuring the right to have a job.
Under the law, employees can refuse to pay union dues. Unions think that dues objectors should receive the employers' first contract offer, and not the union-negotiated contract. This concept is fair. As with the attorney, those who don't pay should receive the unnegotiated terms; those who do should receive the full benefits of the contract negotiated by the union representatives, who the members supported with their votes and dues payments.
In the spirit of fair play, it would seem that the most honest thing to do would be to eliminate the Right to Work Law, or introduce a similar law against businesses. Then, for instance, if we wanted a Cadillac or Lincoln, we could get it and replace it for a newer model every four years, and with full insurance coverage, all free of charge. And the next time we go to an attorney, we could keep all the money he wins for us, and we wouldn't have to pay a dime. Isn't this law convenient!
If everyone were given those rights, all businesses would cease to exist. What better explanation could be given for the Right to Work Law? It is designed to eliminate workplace democracy, not to protect jobs.
While the GOP was preaching less government, they had certain exceptions. Bob Goodlatte, 6th District congressman from Virginia, introduced a National Right to Work Law and also supported and voted for the Team Act, both designed to eliminate workers' rights. Republicans continue to argue that such laws protect those who do not want to pay dues. This would compare with a citizen's not having to pay taxes. However, Goodlatte's actions in Congress proved that he only reserves that right to the ultra wealthy.
Why do you think anti-labor politicians haven't made us aware of this? Could it be because of the power business has over workers' rights? Is our country still the land of, for, and by the people? Are voters being manipulated into voting for one thing and unknowingly getting exactly the opposite?
Richard E. Jeskey of Vinton is Virginia Legislative Director for the United Transportation Union.
LENGTH: Medium: 77 linesby CNB