Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (741271)	9/26/2013 1:34:04 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1571973

Taft–Hartley still leaves federal law with a decidedly pro-union tilt. As for Taft Hartley itself what do you find so objectionable? It outlawed closed shops (while still allowing union-shops, the difference meaning you don't have to be in a union to get a job, but you have to join or pay the union once you get the job if a collective bargaining agreement calls for that). It restricted secondary boycotts and picketing (if your on strike you can walk the picket line. It allowed states to become right to work states (meaning states can outlaw union shops). It required 80 days notice before strikes or lockouts.