Jamo,
Your post was in English and I did not start the thread to begin another argument. Things have changed since I was working. When I was still at work the company approached me about when I retired becoming an instructor and I asked them if the Union would be involved in any way. The answer was No. I would not have to pay any dues or answer in any way to the union, closed or open shop, this was not something the union could meddle in. I would be replacing some instructors they had then that were union people. All I was asking for was a clear explanation of just what they are doing and you gave it in your post. Sorry that I am not versed in labor law enough to know all of the ins and outs.
Edit To Add: Thus, you drew a conclusion based upon a media article which was assolutely wrong and then started a thread which makes it appear that GM is going non-union, which it is not.
Thus, you drew a conclusion based upon a media article which was assolutely wrong and then started a thread which makes it appear that GM is going non-union, which it is not.
I hope this helps in your upcoming Labor Law Newsletter publication series
I just posted what the news article said, I didn't write it and I never understood exactly what they were doing. I am not nor do I ever intend to try and understand the Labor Laws nor do I intend to write any publications. Misunderstood it, yes. That was why I asked you for a clarification of just how it would work. Crap, I can't even post a link to a news headline on here any more without it causing me to get into trouble. I wouldn't dare to express any idea of what I thought they might mean.
Ron
