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