Right to Work

[Lord Thesaurian]

I realize there has probably already been a thread on this at some point, but with the new Right to Work Act passed in the union fortress of Michigan, the topic seemed relevant.

Right to Work, after passage in Michigan, is law in 24 US states. The legislation consists of a basic format which prohibits private sector Unions from forcing employees of any private sector company to join, and also prohibits private sector unions from mandating employee fees and dues. Not surprisingly, the Act is being called "Union busting" by protesters in Michigan. My question is, why? The law does not restrict Union activities in any way; it only exposes internal "Free Rider" problems within the Unions themselves. While I can concede that it is rather ridiculous for a law to enable a union member to enjoy membership benefits without paying dues, to call such legislation "union busting" is a bit of a misnomer, is it not?

Still, after Scott Walker signed various bills easing the process of avoiding public union membership and dues in Wisconsin, due-paying membership fell precipitously. Again, how is this "union busting?" It seems to me that if any union faces problems collecting dues, it has more to do with the increasing autocracy and pyramid-like fiscal and administrative structures within US unions. Nearly half of union members polled in the US are dissatisfied with the way their dues are spent and feel the membership have too little clout in determining the objectives of union funds. Over half of those polled felt that unions in general are too politicized, with 97% of some 380 million dollars in annual union donations to political campaigns going to Democrats, while nearly half of union members are registered Republicans (Source). (Another interesting note is that unions have benefited from the Citizen's United USSC decision just as much as "evil corporations" have, with nearly 80% of union political donations unreported to the FEC. Moreover, the average union costs the host company an average of 35% more in operational costs while gaining a disproportionate 20% higher total wages and benefits value for unionized employees.

All this in mind, it seems that the Right to Work is only "union busting" because it unveils internal problems in private sector unions and undermines the compulsory, mob-like structure and mentality of the labor union concept. What incentive do union members themselves have to protest the measure? No one is banning unions, bargaining rights, or the ability to join a union. If someone is passionate about "workers' rights" and unions, he/she can very well join a union and voluntarily pay dues. Like I said, if any union faces revenue problems on account of lackluster dues collections, it seems more of a problem of accountability to the membership than any "evil corporate cabal" bent on "enslaving workers." In fact, it may reveal the basic social problem with collective and socialistic systems; ie the idea that those who can escape sharing the costs while still enjoying the benefits will do so. Hence, there seems to be one of two issues here, none of which involve "union busting:" either one, unions in the US face leadership accountability and membership incentive problems, or two, the inability of unions to function on voluntary membership indicates the very necessity of mob tactics and force that ideological opponents of labor and trade unions have always complained about. Am I missing something here?

[Raining Red]

The power of unions is in collective action. By allowing workers to opt out, the power of unions to negotiate is severely compromised. Imagine that you are an owner, and 100% of your workers go on strike. At that point you have very little negotiating power. Sure, the workers are losing money by not working, but you are losing even more money from them not working.

Now, if say 20% of the workers opt out so that only 80% have gone on strike, you now have more bargining power. You can drive a wedge between the workers and the union and starve them out. For example, some employees will be getting paid fully during the strike, and would likely get the same benefits in the end. That would cause even more people to drop their support of the union and go back to work. Furthermore, you could point at those who are working and claim that they don't have any issues and that the union is just being abusive and unfair. This would help at both the bargaining table and getting support from the general public.

Without full membership, unions will not be able to get even remotely the deal that they could get with full membership. That is why this Act is considered "union busting".

[Lord Thesaurian]

The power of unions is in collective action. By allowing workers to opt out, the power of unions to negotiate is severely compromised. Imagine that you are an owner, and 100% of your workers go on strike. At that point you have very little negotiating power. Sure, the workers are losing money by not working, but you are losing even more money from them not working.

Now, if say 20% of the workers opt out so that only 80% have gone on strike, you now have more bargining power. You can drive a wedge between the workers and the union and starve them out. For example, some employees will be getting paid fully during the strike, and would likely get the same benefits in the end. That would cause even more people to drop their support of the union and go back to work. Furthermore, you could point at those who are working and claim that they don't have any issues and that the union is just being abusive and unfair. This would help at both the bargaining table and getting support from the general public.

Without full membership, unions will not be able to get even remotely the deal that they could get with full membership. That is why this Act is considered "union busting".

But wouldn't this then clearly indicate the necessity of mob tactics, intimidation and force in the union structure? If 100% of an employee group is drafted into the given union, the host company is essentially held hostage at the mercy of the union. That is a major element of greed on the part of union organizers that has corrupted an originally beneficial concept. If employees are not required to join or remain in a union if they do not care to, then both the union and the employer are held accountable to the employees. If a majority of employees join the union, then the union apparently does represent the interests of the employees and this gives said union an advantage in any conflict with the employer. If a majority of employees choose not to remain in the union, then this in turn puts the union at a disadvantage in a negotiation scenario and forces the former to become more harmonious with the wants and needs of the employees. So, while it is rather nonsensical for Right to Work to allow existing union members to dodge dues, the concept is admirable: freedom of choice. If this means "union busting" for some unions, then like I said, it seems to me it is the unions who are failing to incentivize membership. Let the "consumer" decide which unions stay and which ones go.

While it sounds fair to say employees should have the right to decide to join a union or not and pay the dues its another thing when those workers can continue to work with the union and receive the benefits from that union without paying dues. Id like to see the Unions be able to negotiate wages for ONLY members who pay.

Completely agree.

Strongly agree with the OP. Workers should not be forced into a union and certainly should not be forced to pay dues. You can get benefits without a union, why should I have to pay an external entity to negotiate for me? My bargaining power is stronger as collective? Perhaps, but that doesn't mean I need to pay extra money to a union. Unions should exist as non-profit entities that do not use their power for political purposes and they should evolve naturally if the situation arises where they are necessary.

California has tons of unions, but you don't have to belong to one. I work in manufacturing, we should have a union, but we don't because our employer provides enough to the employees to not make it worth it.

Unions are dinosaurs that need to go away finally. The market won't let a crap company who treats their employees like dirt last for long, especially in the traditional union-heavy sectors like manufacturing.

God, I can't imagine joining a union for a retail job that pays like 10 bucks an hour. So I'm gonna pay like half my check to the union who provides me my benefits, and half of that half goes to pay union honchos. You're ing high. No way you can live on that.

I agree here as well; though to be fair, the average rate of private-sector union dues ranges from 1-5% of gross pay, not "half." Dues often cancel out negotiated pay raises, as trends in dues rates tend to conspicuously follow the rate of pay increases. This is one issue that seemed to anger union members in the previous poll. Union dues tend to cancel out pay raises, resulting in a practical pay freeze. On account of seniority and bureaucratic issues within the union, promotions and special benefits are often jeopardized as well for new and medium-term employees. That might explain why the average age of US union members is 55-64 years, and total union membership rates have hit historic lows and continue to drop slowly but surely.

It seems that based on the data presented thus far, the unions cause many of their own problems; low membership and dues revenue, dissatisfied membership, dwindling popularity and relevance.... If unions in the US continue the current trend of autocratic management and greedy pyramid scheme fiscal structures that damage both the rank and file and the employer, they may indeed become relatively irrelevant to labor relations and the global economy; with the exception of their considerable political power, the very thing that most greatly harms their public image.

This is unfortunate, because the original concept of a labor union is certainly not an "evil" thing. Employees gathering together out of individual self interest and voluntarily submitting funds to further common goals and interests not only provides a clear sense of awareness for the membership, but establishes one of the most powerful tools against the kind of economic monopolization and political plutocracy that has taken over the US and much of the world. It is disappointing that yet another originally beneficial and practical safeguard has been coopted and corrupted by the very thing it was supposed to prevent.

[MathiasOfAthens]

While it sounds fair to say employees should have the right to decide to join a union or not and pay the dues its another thing when those workers can continue to work with the union and receive the benefits from that union without paying dues. Id like to see the Unions be able to negotiate wages for ONLY members who pay.

[I WUB PUGS]

Hence, there seems to be one of two issues here, none of which involve "union busting:" either one, unions in the US face leadership accountability and membership incentive problems, or two, the inability of unions to function on voluntary membership indicates the very necessity of mob tactics and force that ideological opponents of labor and trade unions have always complained about.

Strongly agree with the OP. Workers should not be forced into a union and certainly should not be forced to pay dues. You can get benefits without a union, why should I have to pay an external entity to negotiate for me? My bargaining power is stronger as collective? Perhaps, but that doesn't mean I need to pay extra money to a union. Unions should exist as non-profit entities that do not use their power for political purposes and they should evolve naturally if the situation arises where they are necessary.

California has tons of unions, but you don't have to belong to one. I work in manufacturing, we should have a union, but we don't because our employer provides enough to the employees to not make it worth it.

Unions are dinosaurs that need to go away finally. The market won't let a crap company who treats their employees like dirt last for long, especially in the traditional union-heavy sectors like manufacturing.

God, I can't imagine joining a union for a retail job that pays like 10 bucks an hour. So I'm gonna pay like half my check to the union who provides me my benefits, and half of that half goes to pay union honchos. You're ing high. No way you can live on that.

[justicar5]

Strongly agree with the OP. Workers should not be forced into a union and certainly should not be forced to pay dues. You can get benefits without a union, why should I have to pay an external entity to negotiate for me? My bargaining power is stronger as collective? Perhaps, but that doesn't mean I need to pay extra money to a union. Unions should exist as non-profit entities that do not use their power for political purposes and they should evolve naturally if the situation arises where they are necessary.

The second the TEA Party and the NRA, and all billionaires and corporations get out of politics, is the second unions should. They are the only thing that stands up for the average and low income worker.

This is the extent of the damage union mobs are willing to do.

[

They intimidate, assault, and then tear down a tent with women and children inside.

Add in a few rapes and murders and they will be doing the same that corporate security (and corrupt cops paid for by them) did to the OWS movement.

[Col. Tartleton]

The second the TEA Party and the NRA, and all billionaires and corporations get out of politics, is the second unions should. They are the only thing that stands up for the average and low income worker.

Agreed. However the point here should be, is the Right To Work not more important than any other Right of Workers?

If workers have any rights is it not the right to work in the first place?

Add in a few rapes and murders and they will be doing the same that corporate security (and corrupt cops paid for by them) did to the OWS movement.

Oh, because that couldn't have actually happened? It had to be corporate security ad corrupt police. It couldn't be that massive assemblies of disorganized rabble rousers didn't attract violent individuals?

[justicar5]

1)Agreed. However the point here should be, is the Right To Work not more important than any other Right of Workers?

If workers have any rights is it not the right to work in the first place?



2)Oh, because that couldn't have actually happened? It had to be corporate security ad corrupt police. It couldn't be that massive assemblies of disorganized rabble rousers didn't attract violent individuals?

1)No. They are and have to be equal, for example we can take this other places: Isn't life a more important right than liberty? Isn't Liberty more important than freedom of assembly? Isn't Freedom of Assembly greater than Freedom of Speech? You see what I mean?

If rights can be 'graded' so the 'right to work' is more important than the 'right to a safe work place' or 'right to a livable wage' we get back to victorian working conditions very quickly, you will always find someone with no other choice who has to do what ever comes along, that desperation cannot take away the reasonable expectation of work being fairly compensated and as safe as reasonable precautions can make it (working in a forge, or an engineering shop will never be perfectly safe, but precautions to make it safer minimises risks as much is practicable)


2)Google 'undercover cop photographed at OWS' their are hundreds of hits showing (usually) undercover cop throwing rocks/bottles or smashing something, then an 'after' of them in uniform.(usually on the cordon, same thing happened at the G20 protest in the UK, [and was witnessed by a Lib Dem MP] undercover police doing something violent, then leaving the crowd by showing a badge, the violent act then being used as an excuse for a baton charge or for kettling. The Metropolitan Police: 1400 deaths is in custody with 0 prosecutions: License to kill baby!

[Col. Tartleton]

1)No. They are and have to be equal, for example we can take this other places: Isn't life a more important right than liberty? Isn't Liberty more important than freedom of assembly? Isn't Freedom of Assembly greater than Freedom of Speech? You see what I mean?

You know what I mean though. If you can't get work in the first place what are the other rights really doing for you?

If rights can be 'graded' so the 'right to work' is more important than the 'right to a safe work place' or 'right to a livable wage' we get back to victorian working conditions very quickly, you will always find someone with no other choice who has to do what ever comes along, that desperation cannot take away the reasonable expectation of work being fairly compensated and as safe as reasonable precautions can make it (working in a forge, or an engineering shop will never be perfectly safe, but precautions to make it safer minimises risks as much is practicable)

A right to work is fundamentally more important than a right to a safe work place or a right to a livable wage. If you have to get into a labor union that demands some of your pay to represent you before you can get hired that's a protection racket endorsed by the state. If you don't play along you don't get hired which means that safe workplace and livable wage don't even apply to you.

2)Google 'undercover cop photographed at OWS' their are hundreds of hits showing (usually) undercover cop throwing rocks/bottles or smashing something, then an 'after' of them in uniform.(usually on the cordon, same thing happened at the G20 protest in the UK, [and was witnessed by a Lib Dem MP] undercover police doing something violent, then leaving the crowd by showing a badge, the violent act then being used as an excuse for a baton charge or for kettling. The Metropolitan Police: 1400 deaths is in custody with 0 prosecutions: License to kill baby!

I Googled it and got nothing useful. I'm fairly skeptical. That might be procedure in Eurabia but I don't know about it here in the USA. I don't want to be naive, but that's a pretty ing risky and stupid thing for the police to be doing. I mean we don't take too kindly to those folks around here as it is. That kind of is going to result in dead officers. Americans are armed, impulsive, and reckless. They shouldn't be encouraging people to start shooting cops.

[Lord Thesaurian]

The second the TEA Party and the NRA, and all billionaires and corporations get out of politics, is the second unions should. They are the only thing that stands up for the average and low income worker.

I think it's pretty clear that the larger unions are not always acting in the best interests of the membership, and that's why there is widespread dissatisfaction amongst the rank and file, exhibited by opinion polls, aging membership, and an overall decrease in union workers as a percentage of the total force. Blind sloganeering like "Unions defend the worker against the monopoly man!" is exactly the kind of thing I'm trying to avoid here.

Add in a few rapes and murders and they will be doing the same that corporate security (and corrupt cops paid for by them) did to the OWS movement. The Metropolitan Police: 1400 deaths is in custody with 0 prosecutions: License to kill baby!

Source? There were plenty of sexual assaults within the OWS camps and at least one reported murder suspect. None of them, to my knowledge, were committed by police or independent security. Funny thing is, mass protests motivated by no real goal other than to camp in a park and complain tend to attract the underbelly of society. Go figure.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/sexual-assa...4#.UMoDYG_AeSo
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012...irl-last-month

[justicar5]

1)I think it's pretty clear that the larger unions are not always acting in the best interests of the membership, and that's why there is widespread dissatisfaction amongst the rank and file, exhibited by opinion polls, aging membership, and an overall decrease in union workers as a percentage of the total force. Blind sloganeering like "Unions defend the worker against the monopoly man!" is exactly the kind of thing I'm trying to avoid here.


Source? There were plenty of sexual assaults within the OWS camps and at least one reported murder suspect. None of them, to my knowledge, were committed by police or independent security. Funny thing is, mass protests motivated by no real goal other than to camp in a park and complain tend to attract the underbelly of society. Go figure.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/sexual-assa...4#.UMoDYG_AeSo
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012...irl-last-month

1) Republican kool aid propaganda works, if anyone seriously believes voting conservative is in the interests of anyone without a trust fund...well like I said Kool Aid

2)unlike the financial sector the entire point of which is to steal as much as possible from as many people as possible? A bottle of stolen water valued at 50p gets you 4 months, the banks stole billions so they owe us billions of years in jail. Area managers on up, they can build the prison when they get to the desolate island off the coast of Scotland we choose to site it. Then set up a naval patrol so that no one goes in or out, and leave them seeds and tools to grow food.

[Lord Thesaurian]

1) Republican kool aid propaganda works, if anyone seriously believes voting conservative is in the interests of anyone without a trust fund...well like I said Kool Aid

2)unlike the financial sector the entire point of which is to steal as much as possible from as many people as possible? A bottle of stolen water valued at 50p gets you 4 months, the banks stole billions so they owe us billions of years in jail.

Yes, we all know the economic centralization of the world's resources is largely due to political corruption and corporate monopolization; the union of which is largely responsible for the global centralization and cooperation of the banking system. None of this validates your rather humorous firebrands like "The police/corporate security rape and murder OWS protesters! "Bankers" are evil! Unions are righteous defenders of the proletariat!"

[Kanaric]

Right to slavery and ever declining wages.

In the 1970s and earlier most workers made great wages, had healthcare, benefits, vacation days...... all that is gone now for most people because of union busting. Garbage wage, illegal immigrant slave labor, ZERO benefits so Obamacare is needed, almost no vacation time or time you have to build up to for 5 years meanwhile they lay you off in 2 to avoid paying you benefits and vacation time. Thanks Reagan.

Whats sad is that it's all these hillbillies and white trash that are voting these people in, and its harming themselves. They are voting against themselves just because they hate black people, gays, and think that there is a war on Christmas.

[Admiral Piett]

This is the extent of the damage union mobs are willing to do.



They intimidate, assault, and then tear down a tent with women and children inside.

Right to slavery and ever declining wages.

In the 1970s and earlier most workers made great wages, had healthcare, benefits, vacation days...... all that is gone now for most people because of union busting. Garbage wage, illegal immigrant slave labor, ZERO benefits so Obamacare is needed, almost no vacation time or time you have to build up to for 5 years meanwhile they lay you off in 2 to avoid paying you benefits and vacation time. Thanks Reagan.

Whats sad is that it's all these hillbillies and white trash that are voting these people in, and its harming themselves. They are voting against themselves just because they hate black people, gays, and think that there is a war on Christmas.

Failure to read the OP is present here...

Your acting like this is the death of unions, when absolutely none of these bills have done anything to abolish them or inhibit their abilities. They've simply removed their power to force workers to give them their money and make 100% of their employment to be unionized. Plus, the union-only states are one of the last few legitimate arms of organized crime left in the US. There's a reason why that whole area is considered the most corrupt region in the nation. Take a look at the state of Indiana, which pushed through similar right to work practices and they are experiencing a boom. Michigan has been so paralyzed by the mafia-ran unions that its going to take decades to recover. The unions sure as hell didn't help the fact that the auto workers lost all of their jobs overseas.

Let's say the Catholic Church in bed with the state government mandated in that a percentage of all your wages goes to the church to pay for its charity activities. Yet only a fraction of what is deducted from your pay actually goes to charity, most of it goes straight to lawsuits and donations to the Republican Party. Would you be upset about that?

Right to work states are doing so much better with employment figures and are actually starting to recover from the recession, but the heavily unionized Great Lakes region is lagging strongly behind.

[The spartan]

This is the extent of the damage union mobs are willing to do.

Here's hoping Steven Crowder got hurt doing that. He is a complete idiot/jerk.

They intimidate, assault, and then tear down a tent with women and children inside.

Right, the big bad Unions order members to assault people .

Not like companies have ever hired thugs to beat/kill people trying to unionize *cough cough* Pinkerton Company *cough*

Right to work states are doing so much better with employment figures and are actually starting to recover from the recession, but the heavily unionized Great Lakes region is lagging strongly behind.

Methinks no, you are just making that up. Right to work states have significantly less (1,500 dollars I think) salaries on average than those without "right to work".

[Admiral Piett]

Here's hoping Steven Crowder got hurt doing that. He is a complete idiot/jerk.

I suppose the right for media coverage means jack when it comes from an organization you dislike. It's nice to know that you support thugs tactics without provocation against journalists and women and children who happened to be 'in the way' as well to support your viewpoint on this.

Right, the big bad Unions order members to assault people .

Read. My. Statements. Preferably prior to making glib remarks in an attempt to make your position look strong when it just make it even more stupid. Where did I say the unions as a whole orchestrate this? I said union mobs. You know, ignorant dumb asses that don't know they're being robbed. Kinda doesn't matter that you make 'more' pay when most of that extra money goes involuntary out of your paycheck straight to the Democratic Party and lawsuits. Regardless of your own affiliations or wishes. I dunno how you could think its the greatest thing ever for workers to have money automatically taken from them and given to a private institution with ties to organized crime.

In your eyes though, I have no right to work without a union if I got a job in the auto industry and happened to live there. And I say that's crap.

Not like companies have ever hired thugs to beat/kill people trying to unionize *cough cough* Pinkerton Company *cough*

Oh snap. I didn't realize that the Koch Bros.™ shot Hoffa and buried him in concrete.

Methinks no, you are just making that up. Right to work states have significantly less (1,500 dollars I think) salaries on average than those without "right to work".

http://www.stats.indiana.edu/topic/jobs_wages.asp

http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.mi.htm

I know, it hurts when it turns out people who accuse others of lying are actually the ones being dishonest and with no sources. Furthermore, show me evidence of how the heavily unionized states that haven't become right to work that are keeping up with the other right to work states. You know, people care about having A job than NO job.


Let's get something straight here. I don't dislike unions. These right to work bills? Not anti-union. Nothing in there curtails the ability for workers to join a union if they please and keep all their benefits. It's the uneducated who think this will destroy their union. Because believe it or not, the state government has no legal authority to mandate that your pay has to go to a private institution. It's dubious in legal terms from the very get go. The unions in the Great Lakes region are one the last bastillions of organized crime's influence on politics and legal income. It's that that I have a problem with.

[The spartan]

I suppose the right for media coverage means jack when it comes from an organization you dislike. It's nice to know that you support thugs tactics without provocation against journalists and women and children who happened to be 'in the way' as well to support your viewpoint on this.

Fox can do whatever it wants, I just don't like Steven Crowder. That isn't an ideology issue, he purposely spreads misinformation.

Read. My. Statements. Preferably prior to making glib remarks in an attempt to make your position look strong when it just make it even more stupid. Where did I say the unions as a whole orchestrate this? I said union mobs. You know, ignorant dumb asses that don't know they're being robbed. Kinda doesn't matter that you make 'more' pay when most of that extra money goes involuntary out of your paycheck straight to the Democratic Party and lawsuits. Regardless of your own affiliations or wishes. I dunno how you could think its the greatest thing ever for workers to have money automatically taken from them and given to a private institution with ties to organized crime.

This is the extent of the damage union mobs are willing to do.


They intimidate, assault, and then tear down a tent with women and children inside.

Your implication is: "This is what they do. This is their nature".

In your eyes though, I have no right to work without a union if I got a job in the auto industry and happened to live there. And I say that's crap.

You know you don't have to be in a union in a state without "right to work", right? In any line of work. All right to work does is prohibit contracts between unions and employees that make it compulsory to pay for representation.

Oh snap. I didn't realize that the Koch Bros.™ shot Hoffa and buried him in concrete.

http://www.stats.indiana.edu/topic/jobs_wages.asp

http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.mi.htm

I know, it hurts when it turns out people who accuse others of lying are actually the ones being dishonest and with no sources. Furthermore, show me evidence of how the heavily unionized states that haven't become right to work that are keeping up with the other right to work states. You know, people care about having A job than NO job.

Here ya go.

I am not arguing that economic growth isn't happening quickly in "right to work" states, hell if we start paying workers a nickle a day we would see a lot of economic growth. I am saying states without "right to work" have higher wages and better worker benefits which they need now to compete with empowered corporations.

Let's get something straight here. I don't dislike unions. These right to work bills? Not anti-union. Nothing in there curtails the ability for workers to join a union if they please and keep all their benefits. It's the uneducated who think this will destroy their union. Because believe it or not, the state government has no legal authority to mandate that your pay has to go to a private institution. It's dubious in legal terms from the very get go. The unions in the Great Lakes region are one the last bastillions of organized crime's influence on politics and legal income. It's that that I have a problem with.

It is anti-union. It prohibits important union contracts.

[Thorn777]

Ah "Michigan the union fortress". More like the experimental state of neo-facism with them dictators all openly assetstripping for cents on the $ public property to their billionair buddies and tricking the last remaining democratic processes from the people by delaying tactics.

Like they are out for your right to work. lol rhetoric...lol people

Rick Schnyder "Arbeit macht Frei"

This is the extent of the damage union mobs are willing to do.


.

Well that extent is very little in comparison inst it. Like I wouldnt want be caught in the shower with it type little.

[Gaidin]

Funny part is everybody in this thread knows they didn't have the political backing to get the law passed in a typical committee fashion. Give it about a year and referendum or two years and the next election. Say whatever you want about bad union OR corporate tactics, they just pissed a lot of voters off. People didn't even gather in Wisconsin that fast for protest.

[Col. Tartleton]

I know there are undercover police in every crowd, that's pretty much a given for safety. But if they're committing all the crimes that's kind of a big ing dealing.

I don't believe it.