Enjoy your race to the bottom in a right to work for less state in 15 years.

_________________

Without a union, you have very little protection from abusive labor practices. Or, at least, the people I have worked with have. I'm surprised at how big of a blind spot this is to many people who claim to be socially liberal.

It's Illinois. We already are at the bottom. They need to come after your government pensions too that you don't deserve and are bankrupting us. Get a fucking 401K like everyone else.

The right to work states bordering you are kicking Illinois in the ass. 37,000 more people left last year because they were tired of paying some of the highest tax rates in the country to support public sector unions.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson

Unions are an overall net positive though they are essentially socialistic entities. Without Unions employees would be exploited like hell.

_________________

Now that I agree with.

On top of that, the principal in the 401(k) survives you so your kids get an inheritance and your spouse is taken care of after you kick it.

Pensions on the other hand die with you.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson

What is the current percentage of union employment in the US? Also, breaking out the public would be interesting.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

That may have been true at one time, but one of the effects of the internet and social media is that it's hard for companies to get away with the crap they used to. Things are pretty transparent now.

_________________

Think last i checked it was at 7% for the U.S. Don't know public sector breakdown.

_________________

I tend to agree with this...public sector only.

_________________

There isn't a lol smiley big enough for that statement. Good grief.

...and there goes the middle class down the drain.

_________________

If you work hard, and find a skill/trade that is in demand, you are not going to be an abused worker. Why would a company abuse a worker and cause them to leave?

The reality is, people crying "abused worker" are low skilled, government employees that couldn't make 1/3rd the salary they do now in the private sector. They got setup with a cush government job/pension with a salary way over what their actual skill set. So from their frame of reference, I could see how they would be "scared" of employer abuses, but don't let that narrative drown out the real positive job market situation, if you are willing and able to work hard.

Can you provide some examples of abusive labor practices the unions currently protect that a non-union shop would not?

_________________

MANY do not have excess funds to stash into a 401(k).

Easier said than done.

Yes, the general rule is unions are good for the worst employees, neutral for average employees, and bad for the best employees.

_________________

What government-union apologists define as abuse are what private sector employees define as periods that require hard work, grinding to get a job, project done.

psychological harassment of employees
threatening employees
adding unreasonable duties
selective enforcement of rules

also, when i was a caddy: "you guys all wanna be replaced by golf carts?"

Take responsibility for your finances. It's what mature adults do.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson

B.S many Americans could sacrifice 5% at minimum off their check to a 401(k), it just means living within their means and not being bugmen buying stupid shit off Amazon all the time.

_________________

The 401k would be primarily be funded by employer(state) contributions. For example, guarantee an employee somewhere between 6-15% of their salary to be added to their 401k each year. The cost then becomes known--not some open-ended unlimited pit where the taxpayers are on the hook decades down the line.

_________________

stereotype. too easily refuted.

Social media and political extremists make union protection moot. The trending hashtag destroys all of those protections. Next thing you know your are sitting in a powerpoint about dilation for trannies because someone said something mean on the interwebs; or you are having to work feminist talking points into orientation to make sure people are raping each other at the copier.

_________________

Just have them offer a match up to something like 6%. That's what most of us do. The employee can contribute more than that if they want, but 6% contributions with a match would more or less be 12% of your income stashed away into retirement. Figure an S&P 500 Index Fund with almost no fees (current expense ratios on such a fund are at 0.04) and an 8% annual return and you have a real nest-egg. You should contribute more to build up extra security, but this would at a minimum set you up for a decent retirement.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson

Then do it.

How much money does the avg American have in their 401k at the time of retirement?


Even if its 300-400,000 it still wouldn't compete with the money that a public sector employee will draw from their pension. Depending on the job of course.

_________________

It happens in education all of the time. Charters and Adminstrators get screwed all the time. Why? No union protection.

_________________

That's the problem. They draw this bloated pension they don't deserve, then flee the state, sometimes getting another job and bankrupting Illinois all the while.

why would a public sector employee ever opt out. They are the ones most securely protected by the union environment.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.