Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles; site convex.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!convex!holt
From: holt@convex.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Re: The Sub-Minimum Wage Again
Message-ID: <40500040@convex.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 20-Sep-84 22:52:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: convex.40500040
Posted: Thu Sep 20 22:52:00 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 01:18:25 EDT
References: <485@tty3b.UUCP>
Lines: 22
Nf-ID: #R:tty3b:-48500:convex:40500040:000:971
Nf-From: convex!holt    Sep 20 21:52:00 1984

> The "right-to-work"  argument is a management red herring.
> 
> Mike Kelly

Hogwash.  "Right to work" means that it is not necessary for a person to
belong to a union in order to qualify for a job.  We are talking about
human rights here, not management rights.  Unions want to keep workers 
out who would be willing to work for lesser wages, and do the same job
as union workers.  This is power politics, nothing more, nothing less.
Keeping unions strong by making union membership mandatory is the goal
of disallowing "right-to-work" laws.

foo!  Come on Kelly, how can you assert that right-to-work is a management
red herring.  There are plenty of non-union working class people who
disagree with you.  I know, you sit at your terminal and spout left wing
nonsense, earning your comfortable salary, able to ignore the needs of 
the working class you purport to support.  foo!

				Dave Holt
				Convex Computer Corp.
				{allegra,ihnp4,uiucdcs,ctvax}!convex!holt