ThePhranc wrote:
The unions want to make as much money for the unions as they can. That the workers make more is a byproduct. Remember the more a worker makes the more the union makes. That money from the unions get spent in state capitals and DC. Look at Detroit and look at the South were Kia is. If Kia closes that money goes away and they don't have a union.
Just food for thought. You're suggesting that Unions are concerned primarily with generating income. You further suggest that it leads to bad things. But, think about it. Unions have at least some motivation to do something for their members. They are directly responsible to the membership and the members vote on a lot of things directly. So let's assume that you're right but realize that in the scheme of things, Unions are probably somewhat less self-serving than they might otherwise be.
Okay. What about the businesses their members work for. Are they not 100% concerned with generating income? Do they not answer directly to the Share-holders and Board of Directors? Wouldn't that, according to your view, lead to bad things as well? It seems that even in the most jaundice view, it’s a system where two self-serving entities balance each other. What happens if one of them goes away?
But I'm wasting my time. I can see that you will ignore this post because you have no reply for it. Later in the thread, you will call me intellectually dishonest because you think that sounds very smart.
And you're not guilty of the same thing?
And in my case, it works wonderfully if the union goes away, cause I'm covered under OSHA.
In reply to racerfink:
Uh, me? Guilty of what? I didn't accuse anyone of anything.
racerfink wrote:
And in my case, it works wonderfully if the union goes away, cause I'm covered under OSHA.
For now. But we'll get rid of all that pesky government regulation. Do you really need Congress telling you how to do your job?
mad_machine wrote:
sounds like a worthwhile by product to me.
And you have to admit.. a lot of big business money goes to state capitals and DC too
So inflation is a good thing to you? Waste of money is a good thing to you? Unions strong arming wage hikes so they can get more money while wrapping it up with lies about helping the working man is a good thing to you? Because thats what it is.
racerfink wrote:
And in my case, it works wonderfully if the union goes away, cause I'm covered under OSHA.
But didn't you know you aren't able to care for your self you need some one to do it for you.
There isn't a single thing the unions can get for workers that they can't get for them selves.
You know what... I am done. It is obvious I cannot have a decent conversation about unions with anybody (not just here)
I have said it before.. there are good and bad unions.. just as there are good and bad businesses.. but somehow unions get painted with the bad brush but businesses don't. There are things afoot
ThePhranc wrote:
There isn't a single thing the unions can get for workers that they can't get for them selves.
All they have to do is get together and address concerns. Organize and... wait a minute.
Duke
UberDork
4/26/12 10:20 a.m.
fast_eddie_72 wrote:
Just food for thought. You're suggesting that Unions are concerned primarily with generating income. You further suggest that it leads to bad things.
Okay. What about the businesses their members work for. Are they not 100% concerned with generating income? Do they not answer directly to the Share-holders and Board of Directors? Wouldn't that, according to your view, lead to bad things as well? It seems that even in the most jaundice view, it’s a system where two self-serving entities balance each other. What happens if one of them goes away?
You're ignoring an important point: If I don't like Company X's practices, I don't have to do business with them. But If Union Y has the region sewn up and I'm required to hire them (either legally or through their physical intimidation), I don't have that choice any more.
ThePhranc wrote:
Max_Archer wrote:
Yeah, I don't understand how anybody could hate unions so much unless they've never known anybody who was in one. For every union that's "leathering the pockets" of its members, there are 10 that are making sure that its members get paid a decent living wage for what they do, get reasonable benefits and overtime, and generally don't get screwed by their employers.
My dad is union and in a business where everybody is freelance. Growing up, we wouldn't have had health insurance without the union, and there were several times where the union had to step in to get the employers to actually pay my dad his fair overtime when he was working 60+ hour weeks.
Your dad could have always bought his own insurance and managed his money better. So saying you wouldn't have had it with out the union is intellectually dishonest.
So what you're saying is that my dad, after spending a huge amount of time and money getting his Masters at one of the top schools in the world and getting his license in his field, and becoming one of the most highly regarded people in his entire industry, should have accepted the fact that his employers were going to make him work 12 hour days while paying him for 8? And then, on top of that, he should've paid for health insurance out of pocket for a whole family? Just so he wouldn't have to be part of a big bad union?
Have you ever looked at what it actually costs to get decent insurance for a family, by the way?
On another point. GM and Chrysler went under because they were making crap cars that nobody wanted to buy. Ford employs UAW workers too and they didn't go bankrupt. GM and Chrysler are still employing UAW workers on the cars they're making and selling in the US now, and they're doing fine with those, because people will actually pay for them. If you want to get mad at something that drives costs up, take a look at how much car manufacturers lose paying for their employees' health insurance.
mad_machine wrote:
You know what... I am done. It is obvious I cannot have a decent conversation about unions with anybody (not just here)
I have said it before.. there are good and bad unions.. just as there are good and bad businesses.. but somehow unions get painted with the bad brush but businesses don't. There are things afoot
I agree with you. These unions threads make me want to insert my head in a wall. I am done.
Duke
UberDork
4/26/12 10:24 a.m.
mad_machine wrote:
You know what... I am done. It is obvious I cannot have a decent conversation about unions with anybody (not just here)
I have said it before.. there are good and bad unions.. just as there are good and bad businesses.. but somehow unions get painted with the bad brush but businesses don't. There are things afoot
Forgive me for repeating myself:
You're ignoring an important point: If I don't like Company X's practices, I don't have to do business with them. But If Union Y has the region sewn up and I'm required to hire them (either legally or through their physical intimidation), I don't have that choice any more.
I've never seen a union do anything for it's members that didn't do anything for the union itself. Entirely self-serving for the union. AGAIN... The union here cut the throat of the workers with less than 12 years in because they weren't concerned in the least about them. Tell me how after giving some workers as much as a 60% raise, you can cut other workers so that they make the same or less than when they started? The guys with the 60% raises make around 50% more than most people for the same job AT PRIVATE COMPANIES. And in talking with the parent union, being told "well, we don't really deal with your line of work too much, so we let your local guys handle it." That tells me they're in it for the slice of members paychecks.
Take a look at pensions for city workers from places like New York City. There's a reason they all came down to Florida and drove the home prices up. They spent money like crazy, and made it an expensive place to live. All because unions had TOO MUCH power. And don't even get me started on the "open ballot" crap.
Duke wrote:
You're ignoring an important point: If I don't like Company X's practices, **I don't have to do business with them.** But If Union Y has the region sewn up and I'm **required** to hire them (either legally or through their physical intimidation), *I don't have that choice any more.*
I wasn't ignoring it, it just wasn't brought up in the post I was responding to.
What you say isn't strictly true for either side. To use your argument, no one can force anyone to join a union. I can choose to work somewhere else. Similarly, no one is forced to sign a union contract. It is negotiated and if the terms are not acceptable, negotiations should continue. Once a contract is signed, however, it does seem reasonable that its conditions are adhered to.
racerfink wrote:
All because unions had TOO MUCH power.
I'll try to get out of this after this one.
I agree with you in large part here. Many unions have had too much power. And we're seeing that get corrected. I've sat in negotiations (on the management side) a couple of times now where the union has agreed to pay freezes and fewer benefits. Why? Because times are tough and they see that we're not trying to screw anyone, just keep our business viable. That's happening a lot, as I understand it.
What I object to is the suggestion that the only solution is to abolish unions or gut their negotiating ability. If you don't like what your union is doing, you should try to change it, or get a job somewhere else. I was a union member early in my career. I ran into them a couple of times. I told them point-blank "won't be a problem, I don't plan to be here long". I wasn't. We all have that choice.
Management side looks better to you than the union side? Work hard and become a manager. But don't bemoan the unions because your ideal work situation for your current station in life and stage of your career doesn't exist. That's just reality. My job isn't exactly what I'd like it to be all the time and at my stage of my career. I could quit. On the whole, the good outweighs the bad and I stay. You do the same. It's a fee country. Nobody held a gun to your head.
mad_machine wrote:
You know what... I am done. It is obvious I cannot have a decent conversation about unions with anybody (not just here)
I have said it before.. there are good and bad unions.. just as there are good and bad businesses.. but somehow unions get painted with the bad brush but businesses don't. There are things afoot
You can't have a decent conversation because people dont agree with you and state truths you dont want to here.
Max_Archer wrote:
ThePhranc wrote:
Max_Archer wrote:
Yeah, I don't understand how anybody could hate unions so much unless they've never known anybody who was in one. For every union that's "leathering the pockets" of its members, there are 10 that are making sure that its members get paid a decent living wage for what they do, get reasonable benefits and overtime, and generally don't get screwed by their employers.
My dad is union and in a business where everybody is freelance. Growing up, we wouldn't have had health insurance without the union, and there were several times where the union had to step in to get the employers to actually pay my dad his fair overtime when he was working 60+ hour weeks.
Your dad could have always bought his own insurance and managed his money better. So saying you wouldn't have had it with out the union is intellectually dishonest.
So what you're saying is that my dad, after spending a huge amount of time and money getting his Masters at one of the top schools in the world and getting his license in his field, and becoming one of the most highly regarded people in his entire industry, should have accepted the fact that his employers were going to make him work 12 hour days while paying him for 8? And then, on top of that, he should've paid for health insurance out of pocket for a whole family? Just so he wouldn't have to be part of a big bad union?
Have you ever looked at what it actually costs to get decent insurance for a family, by the way?
On another point. GM and Chrysler went under because they were making crap cars that nobody wanted to buy. Ford employs UAW workers too and they didn't go bankrupt. GM and Chrysler are still employing UAW workers on the cars they're making and selling in the US now, and they're doing fine with those, because people will actually pay for them. If you want to get mad at something that drives costs up, take a look at how much car manufacturers lose paying for their employees' health insurance.
Or your dad could have gotten another job. He didn't have to accept anything. Isn't being free to work some where else just great?
I own two companies I know exactly how much it costs to get insurance for a family. I also know its cheaper to pay cash.
fast_eddie_72 wrote:
ThePhranc wrote:
There isn't a single thing the unions can get for workers that they can't get for them selves.
All they have to do is get together and address concerns. Organize and... wait a minute.
Actually they did have to get together and organize.
ThePhranc wrote:
Actually they did have to get together and organize.
Wait. What is it you think a Union is? Unions can't do anything a group of workers who get together and organize can't do for themselves? Uhhhh.
I can see by the pattern of your posts, you will now attack Max Archer's father.
ThePhranc wrote:
Max_Archer wrote:
ThePhranc wrote:
Max_Archer wrote:
Yeah, I don't understand how anybody could hate unions so much unless they've never known anybody who was in one. For every union that's "leathering the pockets" of its members, there are 10 that are making sure that its members get paid a decent living wage for what they do, get reasonable benefits and overtime, and generally don't get screwed by their employers.
My dad is union and in a business where everybody is freelance. Growing up, we wouldn't have had health insurance without the union, and there were several times where the union had to step in to get the employers to actually pay my dad his fair overtime when he was working 60+ hour weeks.
Your dad could have always bought his own insurance and managed his money better. So saying you wouldn't have had it with out the union is intellectually dishonest.
So what you're saying is that my dad, after spending a huge amount of time and money getting his Masters at one of the top schools in the world and getting his license in his field, and becoming one of the most highly regarded people in his entire industry, should have accepted the fact that his employers were going to make him work 12 hour days while paying him for 8? And then, on top of that, he should've paid for health insurance out of pocket for a whole family? Just so he wouldn't have to be part of a big bad union?
Have you ever looked at what it actually costs to get decent insurance for a family, by the way?
On another point. GM and Chrysler went under because they were making crap cars that nobody wanted to buy. Ford employs UAW workers too and they didn't go bankrupt. GM and Chrysler are still employing UAW workers on the cars they're making and selling in the US now, and they're doing fine with those, because people will actually pay for them. If you want to get mad at something that drives costs up, take a look at how much car manufacturers lose paying for their employees' health insurance.
Or your dad could have gotten another job. He didn't have to accept anything. Isn't being free to work some where else just great?
I own two companies I know exactly how much it costs to get insurance for a family. I also know its cheaper to pay cash.
Because it's really easy to just give everything up and get another job when you've spent most of your adult life developing education and skills for a specific field?
See, the great thing is that he didn't have to go get a different job, because his union made sure that he was compensated fairly for what he did.
Max_Archer wrote:
ThePhranc wrote:
Max_Archer wrote:
ThePhranc wrote:
Max_Archer wrote:
Yeah, I don't understand how anybody could hate unions so much unless they've never known anybody who was in one. For every union that's "leathering the pockets" of its members, there are 10 that are making sure that its members get paid a decent living wage for what they do, get reasonable benefits and overtime, and generally don't get screwed by their employers.
My dad is union and in a business where everybody is freelance. Growing up, we wouldn't have had health insurance without the union, and there were several times where the union had to step in to get the employers to actually pay my dad his fair overtime when he was working 60+ hour weeks.
Your dad could have always bought his own insurance and managed his money better. So saying you wouldn't have had it with out the union is intellectually dishonest.
So what you're saying is that my dad, after spending a huge amount of time and money getting his Masters at one of the top schools in the world and getting his license in his field, and becoming one of the most highly regarded people in his entire industry, should have accepted the fact that his employers were going to make him work 12 hour days while paying him for 8? And then, on top of that, he should've paid for health insurance out of pocket for a whole family? Just so he wouldn't have to be part of a big bad union?
Have you ever looked at what it actually costs to get decent insurance for a family, by the way?
On another point. GM and Chrysler went under because they were making crap cars that nobody wanted to buy. Ford employs UAW workers too and they didn't go bankrupt. GM and Chrysler are still employing UAW workers on the cars they're making and selling in the US now, and they're doing fine with those, because people will actually pay for them. If you want to get mad at something that drives costs up, take a look at how much car manufacturers lose paying for their employees' health insurance.
Or your dad could have gotten another job. He didn't have to accept anything. Isn't being free to work some where else just great?
I own two companies I know exactly how much it costs to get insurance for a family. I also know its cheaper to pay cash.
Because it's really easy to just give everything up and get another job when you've spent most of your adult life developing education and skills for a specific field?
See, the great thing is that he didn't have to go get a different job, because his union made sure that he was compensated fairly for what he did.
You'd think with someone who had such esteemed marketable skills he would have had to scrimp and beg or join a union to get paid fairly. I'm sure a non-union employer would have paid him a perfectly fair wage. It's all good when your feeding at that union truth and are under the false impression the unions care about you. Your daddy didn't work for a union he worked for a company, a company that would have paid him the same amount with out the union if was smart enough to negotiate it on his own. Obviously he couldn't handle that aspect of his employment on his own and had to get some one else to take care of him.
Unions are for profit companies they care about their bottom line and how much they can make of the backs of their dues paying members.
People don't really need unions they just need to be personally responsible for their own employment. But it is easier to relegate that responsibility to some one else so I can understand why some have to do it. It's just like how so many have become wards of the nanny state.
ThePhranc wrote:
Max_Archer wrote:
ThePhranc wrote:
Max_Archer wrote:
ThePhranc wrote:
Max_Archer wrote:
Yeah, I don't understand how anybody could hate unions so much unless they've never known anybody who was in one. For every union that's "leathering the pockets" of its members, there are 10 that are making sure that its members get paid a decent living wage for what they do, get reasonable benefits and overtime, and generally don't get screwed by their employers.
My dad is union and in a business where everybody is freelance. Growing up, we wouldn't have had health insurance without the union, and there were several times where the union had to step in to get the employers to actually pay my dad his fair overtime when he was working 60+ hour weeks.
Your dad could have always bought his own insurance and managed his money better. So saying you wouldn't have had it with out the union is intellectually dishonest.
So what you're saying is that my dad, after spending a huge amount of time and money getting his Masters at one of the top schools in the world and getting his license in his field, and becoming one of the most highly regarded people in his entire industry, should have accepted the fact that his employers were going to make him work 12 hour days while paying him for 8? And then, on top of that, he should've paid for health insurance out of pocket for a whole family? Just so he wouldn't have to be part of a big bad union?
Have you ever looked at what it actually costs to get decent insurance for a family, by the way?
On another point. GM and Chrysler went under because they were making crap cars that nobody wanted to buy. Ford employs UAW workers too and they didn't go bankrupt. GM and Chrysler are still employing UAW workers on the cars they're making and selling in the US now, and they're doing fine with those, because people will actually pay for them. If you want to get mad at something that drives costs up, take a look at how much car manufacturers lose paying for their employees' health insurance.
Or your dad could have gotten another job. He didn't have to accept anything. Isn't being free to work some where else just great?
I own two companies I know exactly how much it costs to get insurance for a family. I also know its cheaper to pay cash.
Because it's really easy to just give everything up and get another job when you've spent most of your adult life developing education and skills for a specific field?
See, the great thing is that he didn't have to go get a different job, because his union made sure that he was compensated fairly for what he did.
You'd think with someone who had such esteemed marketable skills he would have had to scrimp and beg or join a union to get paid fairly. I'm sure a non-union employer would have paid him a perfectly fair wage. It's all good when your feeding at that union truth and are under the false impression the unions care about you. Your daddy didn't work for a union he worked for a company, a company that would have paid him the same amount with out the union if was smart enough to negotiate it on his own. Obviously he couldn't handle that aspect of his employment on his own and had to get some one else to take care of him.
Unions are for profit companies they care about their bottom line and how much they can make of the backs of their dues paying members.
People don't really need unions they just need to be personally responsible for their own employment. But it is easier to relegate that responsibility to some one else so I can understand why some have to do it. It's just like how so many have become wards of the nanny state.
It's a freelance industry with limited employment. Nobody works a job for more than a couple years, and most are only a few months. There are non-union jobs, and he's taken them before. They pay you the same rate, yes, until they don't want to pay you overtime, or don't want to compensate you for your equipment, or they just make you do all the hard work in the first few weeks, then push you out and hire somebody much less competent at a lower wage to do the minor stuff for the rest of the season.
His union makes very little profit and provides huge benefits for their members. They don't even have to pay dues as long as they work enough hours (about three months of employment) a year, and they're even allowed to take non-union jobs. They have one of the best HMO/PPO systems in the country. Their leadership is composed of people who make their money by working in the same industry as their members. There is one union that stretches across everybody with this job in this field and 90% of jobs are union, not because the union makes them do it, but because it's the only way to ensure that you get competent employees.
Corporations are for profit companies who care about their bottom line and how much they can make on the backs of their employees. Those employees individually have almost no power to do anything when those companies refuse to treat them fairly. The only way anybody has ever gotten anywhere in this situation is by organizing into a group too large for companies to simply write off. That's called a union.
Oh, and I really appreciate the personal attacks on my father, who you don't know, and who you know nothing about.
ThePhranc wrote:
Unions are for profit companies they care about their bottom line and how much they can make of the backs of their dues paying members.
Max_Archer wrote:
His union makes very little profit and provides huge benefits for their members.
I think you both may need to do a little homework. You seem to have some honest misconceptions about exactly what a labor union is, making this among the least productive in a line of unproductive political threads. And with that, I really will get on with my day.
Geez. Unions are bad because for-profit industry is evil. I really have seen it all now.
You will now call me intellectually dishonest...
