Share This Page

Right vs. privilege

| Sunday, Feb. 9, 2014, 9:00 p.m.

In response to the letter “Workers' rights in peril” , I need to bring up a definition of terms. A right is endowed to us by our creator and is not revocable. Since I don't think God granted a person the right to stand at a toll booth and collect exorbitant wages/pensions/benefits, we must assume the job to be a privilege and thus it must be earned .

The employee-employer relationship is a business transaction. You provide a product/service that I want to buy, and I pay you what we both agree that product is worth, not unlike buying a car or house. With labor unions threatening strikes, there is no mutual agreement in that transaction, just extortion (which is a crime).

Right-to-work states' economies are thriving. How are the union-controlled states faring these days?

The state and local municipalities are broke, which in no small part is due to union rules/wages. It's not being an “extremist” to want to rectify a dysfunctional system that is putting us on the fast track to bankruptcy court. Poor management in the past has allowed this to become a runaway train, and it's going to take a derailment to stop it.

Make ours a right-to-work state and watch the corporations that want to move to Pennsylvania, as we have a lot of resources, talent and motivated youths here in Western Pennsylvania. Let's not lose them to Texas because of greedy union bosses. That most certainly is a right — the right to use your God-given talents.

Greg Massung

North Huntingdon

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.