Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

A retired U.S. Marine who runs a Massachusetts high school's ROTC program says he faces termination if he doesn't pay a $500 union fee by next week, a levy he refuses to pay because he already receives medical and dental benefits from the military.

Maj. Stephen Godin, senior naval science instructor at the Naval Junior ROTC Unit at North High School in Worcester, Mass., told FoxNews.com he has been teaching for the Educational Association for Worcester for 15 years -- including 14 at North High School -- without having to join the union or pay an "agency fee" toward the cost of collective bargaining.

An official with the Massachusetts Teachers Association said state law requires public employees -- including teachers at public schools -- to join unions as a condition of employment or to pay an agency fee.

ASUG8 wrote:There was a time and place for unions, but now I agree with the extortion argument. They unnaturally inflate wages and make product/service costs ridiculously high.

Chizzang wrote:If you think you need a Labor Union, you probably deserve one..!!!

polsongrizz wrote:The guy knew before he took the job that it was required for employment. If he knew he was never going to join he never should have accepted the job, period. Does he believe he deserves special treatment because he is a former Marine? I don't think he does.

AZGrizFan wrote:

polsongrizz wrote:The guy knew before he took the job that it was required for employment. If he knew he was never going to join he never should have accepted the job, period. Does he believe he deserves special treatment because he is a former Marine? I don't think he does.

How about 15 years of precedent?

polsongrizz wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
How about 15 years of precedent?

Are you saying that former military personnel don't have to join unions where applicable? I have never heard of such a thing, and if there is it is bullshite.

Like I said, he knew the facts going in he chose to ignore them and is now crying about it.

polsongrizz wrote:The guy knew before he took the job that it was required for employment. If he knew he was never going to join he never should have accepted the job, period. Does he believe he deserves special treatment because he is a former Marine? I don't think he does.

native wrote:

polsongrizz wrote:The guy knew before he took the job that it was required for employment. If he knew he was never going to join he never should have accepted the job, period. Does he believe he deserves special treatment because he is a former Marine? I don't think he does.

Wrong answer, nutcase. It is an abomination for anyone to be forced to join a union to accept employment.

native wrote:

polsongrizz wrote:The guy knew before he took the job that it was required for employment. If he knew he was never going to join he never should have accepted the job, period. Does he believe he deserves special treatment because he is a former Marine? I don't think he does.

Wrong answer, nutcase. It is an abomination for anyone to be forced to join a union to accept employment.

houndawg wrote:

native wrote:
Wrong answer, nutcase. It is an abomination for anyone to be forced to join a union to accept employment.

Lots of cops and airline pilots disagree, evidently.

bobbythekidd wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Lots of cops and airline pilots disagree, evidently.

Just because they had to join a union to practice their vocation doesn't mean they agree with the policy.

houndawg wrote:

native wrote:
Wrong answer, nutcase. It is an abomination for anyone to be forced to join a union to accept employment.

Lots of cops and airline pilots disagree, evidently.

Col Hogan wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Lots of cops and airline pilots disagree, evidently.

Maybe they are just when it comes to this subject...

houndawg wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
Maybe they are just when it comes to this subject...

Could be, pilots tend to be linear thinkers, but safety is the more likely reason. Your smaller non-union airlines tend to have worse safety records and more incidences of things like crews falling asleep in the cockpit while on duty. I don't see what the big deal is, unions can be voted out by the same members that voted them in if they aren't happy with their representation.

AZGrizFan wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Could be, pilots tend to be linear thinkers, but safety is the more likely reason. Your smaller non-union airlines tend to have worse safety records and more incidences of things like crews falling asleep in the cockpit while on duty. I don't see what the big deal is, unions can be voted out by the same members that voted them in if they aren't happy with their representation.

How many instances are there of unions being decertified?

houndawg wrote:

bobbythekidd wrote: Just because they had to join a union to practice their vocation doesn't mean they agree with the policy.

So vote to decertify the union if you don't want one, no big deal.

kalm wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
How many instances are there of unions being decertified?

Probably the same amount as corporations having their charter revoked. Let's get them both out of politics.

AZGrizFan wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Could be, pilots tend to be linear thinkers, but safety is the more likely reason. Your smaller non-union airlines tend to have worse safety records and more incidences of things like crews falling asleep in the cockpit while on duty. I don't see what the big deal is, unions can be voted out by the same members that voted them in if they aren't happy with their representation.

How many instances are there of unions being decertified?