Trump begint de dag van de Arbeid met aanval op Amerikaanse vakbondsleider (nbcnews.com)

De hork. Moet ie vooral doen, ruzie maken met de bonden.

In zijn geniale domheid overtreft hij zichzelf keer op keer.

** gebruiker verwijderd **

Tja, een ding is iig erg prettig bij die man, hij regeert zo'n beetje net als iedereen (met enig inzicht) verwacht had. Helaas echter is er van de belofte 'heel presidentieel' te worden, niet veel terecht gekomen, maar bij de rest van al zijn onzin beloften houdt hij toch redelijk koers (richting de afgrond).

Had hij weer niets te doen. Boodschappen voor iedereen die wil luisteren en ook diegenen die hem voor gek verklaren. Lachend heeft Assad en Putin zijn bericht ontvangen over Idlib. Als ik Trump was zou ik mijn militairen en vriendjes maar heel snel daar weghalen.

Niet weten hoe de bonden werken in de States (je ben verplicht lid en moet betalen aan de bond),maar wel lekker afgeven op Trump :

Lees dit maar eens :
Although the heightened levels of accountability are making union officials nervous, the concept of worker freedom from coercion is widely supported by the public. Poll after poll shows that 8 in 10 Americans oppose forced union dues and affiliation.

Since 2012, five states have seen new Right to Work laws go into effect. Not only do these laws protect workers’ free choice, but the elimination of forced unionism also gives a boost to the state economy.

For example, just days after the start of 2017, Kentucky passed a Right to Work law that went into effect immediately. U.S. Labor Department data show that 43,000 net new people were added to Kentucky’s employment rolls last year.

Compare this to Missouri, where a Big Labor forced-dues funded ballot initiative blocked the state’s Right to Work law from taking effect. From 2016 to 2017, while neighboring Kentucky enjoyed its employment boost, Missouri’s total number of employed people dropped by nearly 3000.

Right to Work brings clear economic benefits and the support of most American workers who like the choice it provides. Yet union bosses claim that giving employees the right to choose to support a labor union is anti-worker.

For union officials, political activism takes precedence over the priorities of the rank-and-file far too often. Its multi-billion dollar political machine – fed by union dues – enables Big Labor to wield immense clout in Washington, D.C., and state capitals, even though much of that money is spent on candidates and causes opposed by many of the workers union officials claim to represent.

For union officials, their privileges pay off. After all, why bother with the hard work of representing employees as long as they are sitting on a forced-dues revenue stream guaranteed by a government-granted special power?

If union membership, representation, and dues payment were strictly voluntary, union officials would have to earn workers’ support, and officials would need to be accountable and responsive to the rank-and-file or else face a loss of revenue. Instead, workers pay billions each year to union bosses simply because they would lose their jobs if they did not.

Perhaps this Labor Day, union officials should take a step back and reexamine how reliant they are on government-granted compulsory powers…and how this causes millions of American workers to view them as out of touch with those they seek to “represent.”