472
Missouri voters pass measure to protect abortion rights and end ban
(www.nytimes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
472 points (98.8% liked)
News
36883 readers
644 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yup. So basically you get a union shop in one of the states where this hasn't passed, it was voted in by the people working to be union and have representation. Representation has the costs, like the negotiators and lawyers that represent the workers. If a shop chooses that, anyone working there is paying dues to the shop, this sounds awful except the union jobs usually pay vastly better than the non-union jobs around here.
Now you don't have to join the union, they do create "fair-share" fees, these fees cover nonpolitical costs of the union like collective bargaining. The unions are by federal law required to represent employees who don't join the union, so this is what's covered. Right-To-Work means that the fair share fees are gone, and people being people, means less people are throwing in to the pool until basically a union shop doesn't have enough to pay for the representation. 26 of the 50 US states are right to work, the Supreme Court ruled in 2018 that union shops in public sector are unconstitutional, so we have maybe 6% of US workers in unions.
In the Missouri case, the state legislature passed a right-to-work law and signed in, but a referendum came up (Missouri gets a lot of these, basically petitions come and they get voted on by the state. WHICH BY THE WAY the republicans also has tried to get rid of because of this, and abortion) and the states electorate repealed the law with a 2 to 1 vote, even deep red parts of the state were hard against that.
Now every time Right-to-work comes up on bill, it's always characterized by the Republicans "It allows you to quit a job any time you want!" No, that's At-Will Employment, and that's also a shyster move because the more important part is that a company can let a person go at any point without reason, literally it's harder to fire someone and get in trouble, like protected parts of race or gender or such. There is no grounds for recourse for the person, they're just out on their ass. Only 8 states are not At Will.
Thanks for the in-depth response! These fair-share fees sound great, an anti-scab fee haha