Stan306 Wrote:
Nov 22, 2012 10:06 AM
Now there is a discussion I've been wondering about. I like the concept of saying that unemployment benefits do not apply to workers who are laid off because of union strikes. But it seems like a difficult thing to universally apply. I know a number of people who are in unions because they have no choice and don't agree with either paying dues or the decisions that the unions make at the negotiation table with business owners. I agree with your premise, I just can't figure out how you keep from penalizing people who are stuck in a union when they don't want to be and don't seem to have the power to disband the union. I'm also on board with the "sooner the better" concept...