74 replies to this topic

[aztek]

i remember few years back when mta had to downsize, they laid off hundreds of union workers, next day in one of the bus depots, hudreds of buses had their fare collecting equipment vandalized, they were full of expanding foam. the same day union leader was screaming, that he was absolutely positive that it were not former employess, but angry passengers that did that, yea right, they walked into guarded (by union workers) garage, took time to pump equipment with foam, and no one saw a thing. yea angry passengers.
i have no problem with union gone and their accounts frozen, the sooner the better.

back in 20s there was a need for unions, now that need is long gone, unions the way they are, expired and rotting. need to burn them so no trace left.

[F3SS]

Sakari, on 11 December 2012 - 01:40 AM, said:

Nevada is considered a " right to work State ".

I can say, everyone that lives and works there know what that really means, and say it often ...." right to fire State "

Please people. You have to watch this video.
You mean fire people like this? How on Earth can these guys get their job back. The video eludes "to their off-duty conduct" and something tells me that's what won the case. Unbelievable. And these idiots build cars that your life depends on. This case is the reason 'right to work' must prevail. How much time, money and resources did the union spend on these chumps? Plus, what happens to their replacements? If they get canned I would fight and banter my union nonstop about wrongful termination and hypocrisy.
http://www.myfoxdetr...&clipId=8044879

[F3SS]

Quote

Rick Snyder: Right To Work Bills Signed Into Law In Michigan
WASHINGTON -- Gov. Rick Snyder ® officially made Michigan a "right-to-work" state on Tuesday, signing into law two bills that significantly diminish the power of unions.

"I have signed these bills into law. ... We are moving forward on the topic of workplace fairness and equality," he said at a press conference on Tuesday evening, just hours after the state House passed the bills.

Right-to-work laws forbid contracts between companies and unions that require all workers to pay the union for bargaining on their behalf. Although business groups and conservatives cast the issue in terms of workplace freedom, unions note that the laws allow workers to opt out of supporting the union although they reap the benefits of the collective bargaining. Since the laws tend to weaken unions generally, unions, as well as President Barack Obama, call the legislation "right to work for less." http://www.huffingto...nk3&pLid=244324

Edited by -Mr_Fess-, 12 December 2012 - 01:38 AM.

[supervike]

-Mr_Fess-, on 11 December 2012 - 04:04 AM, said:

Basically, according to that article, the union can do whatever it wants with your dues so long as they give it back if you complain. Lol. What if business owners, CEOs were doing that? Oh the outrage and rightly so.

]

Ceo's and corporations DO give (and unchecked amounts) to political campaigns.  That is what the whole 'corporations are people too' argument is about.

PACS are not fair game.  Union Dues cannot be given to Federal candidates at all, individuals or PACS.  Seperate volunteer only funds can be.

Edited by supervike, 12 December 2012 - 02:13 AM.

[supervike]

aztek, on 11 December 2012 - 09:43 PM, said:

i remember few years back when mta had to downsize, they laid off hundreds of union workers, next day in one of the bus depots, hudreds of buses had their fare collecting equipment vandalized, they were full of expanding foam. the same day union leader was screaming, that he was absolutely positive that it were not former employess, but angry passengers that did that, yea right, they walked into guarded (by union workers) garage, took time to pump equipment with foam, and no one saw a thing. yea angry passengers.
i have no problem with union gone and their accounts frozen, the sooner the better.

back in 20s there was a need for unions, now that need is long gone, unions the way they are, expired and rotting. need to burn them so no trace left.

And how long would it be before sweatshops, no overtime pay, unsafe worker conditions return?  Unions help balance out ramshod corporate concerns.

I don't disagree that Unions need some major reform, but to see them gone would be just as bad as to see them everywhere.  There needs to be a balance.

[DieChecker]

supervike, on 12 December 2012 - 02:12 AM, said:

Ceo's and corporations DO give (and unchecked amounts) to political campaigns.  That is what the whole 'corporations are people too' argument is about.

PACS are not fair game.  Union Dues cannot be given to Federal candidates at all, individuals or PACS.  Seperate volunteer only funds can be.

But dues can be used to pay for officers of the union whos only job is to work with lawyers and lobbiests to get their union better political treatment. They can pay people to work on politics, but can not directly hand over cash. At least that is how I understand it from the couple hours of reading I did yesterday.

[F3SS]

supervike, on 12 December 2012 - 02:17 AM, said:

And how long would it be before sweatshops, no overtime pay, unsafe worker conditions return?  Unions help balance out ramshod corporate concerns.

I don't disagree that Unions need some major reform, but to see them gone would be just as bad as to see them everywhere.  There needs to be a balance.

Now you know that won't happen. Remember, we have fair working laws already on the books. How else can you explain all the top notch companies that aren't under union control?

[DieChecker]

Intel, where I work, is non-union and has the best healthcare that I have ever had. And with a bachelors degree I am making 70k a year. The job actually only calls for a Associates, but it pays better then the other engineering positions I had previously. That is including union jobs I've worked at. Here I can go to my manager every year and sell myself for a promotion or a good raise, and to sell myself I work hard and list the various accomplishments I did that year.

I think probably not all union shops work this way, but the ones I've known, the union is critical in promotions and raises, and it is more about how long you have been in the union, then what you have done that year, that determines what you get.

[supervike]

DieChecker, on 12 December 2012 - 02:18 AM, said:

But dues can be used to pay for officers of the union whos only job is to work with lawyers and lobbiests to get their union better political treatment. They can pay people to work on politics, but can not directly hand over cash. At least that is how I understand it from the couple hours of reading I did yesterday.

Yep, I believe you are right on there.  I did a bunch of reading on it as well, that seems to be the gist of it.

[supervike]

-Mr_Fess-, on 12 December 2012 - 02:23 AM, said:

Now you know that won't happen. Remember, we have fair working laws already on the books. How else can you explain all the top notch companies that aren't under union control?

That's my point.   Those laws are on the books right now, but if Corporations only have the cash, lobby, and voice to be heard by the lawmakers, how long would it be until labor friendly laws start going away?  Or changing to benefit the almighty dollar?

I do wish Labor Unions were more progressive, and not trapped into the way of thinking from generations ago.   I still think they serve a vital function to our working class folks.

[aztek]

supervike, on 12 December 2012 - 02:17 AM, said:

And how long would it be before sweatshops, no overtime pay, unsafe worker conditions return?  Unions help balance out ramshod corporate concerns.

I don't disagree that Unions need some major reform, but to see them gone would be just as bad as to see them everywhere.  There needs to be a balance.

i'm pretty sure those times wont come back, i work for non union comapny for looong time, great pay\benefits, and company is on the list of 10 greatest companies to work for. there are thousands examples of none union companies treating their employees\assosiates just fine with no union intervention.

[Dredimus]

supervike, on 12 December 2012 - 02:17 AM, said:

And how long would it be before sweatshops, no overtime pay, unsafe worker conditions return?  Unions help balance out ramshod corporate concerns.

I don't disagree that Unions need some major reform, but to see them gone would be just as bad as to see them everywhere.  There needs to be a balance.

There are mulitiple government regulations and organisations already in place that handle everything you just mentioned... OSHA is a major one... I mean, OSHA alone takes care of the "sweat shop" and "unsafe worker conditions" you mentioned. Minimal pay is regulated by the states and fed... and the Fair Labor Standards Act clearly state that if an employer request that an employee works over 40 hours then the employee must receive overtime pay for hours worked in excess of 40 in a workweek of at least one and one-half times their regular rates of pay.... So you see... unions are not needed...

[questionmark]

Dredimus, on 12 December 2012 - 07:50 PM, said:

There are mulitiple government regulations and organisations already in place that handle everything you just mentioned... OSHA is a major one... I mean, OSHA alone takes care of the "sweat shop" and "unsafe worker conditions" you mentioned. Minimal pay is regulated by the states and fed... and the Fair Labor Standards Act clearly state that if an employer request that an employee works over 40 hours then the employee must receive overtime pay for hours worked in excess of 40 in a workweek of at least one and one-half times their regular rates of pay.... So you see... unions are not needed...

And because these government regulations are so well enforced we don't have millions of illegal aliens working under despicable conditions and for less than minimum wages...we know that the government is the cure for all... sure do...

[DieChecker]

questionmark, on 12 December 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

And because these government regulations are so well enforced we don't have millions of illegal aliens working under despicable conditions and for less than minimum wages...we know that the government is the cure for all... sure do...

Huh? Let 'em form a union...

There is an agency for them... the INS.

Edited by DieChecker, 12 December 2012 - 08:39 PM.

[questionmark]

DieChecker, on 12 December 2012 - 08:38 PM, said:

Huh? Let 'em form a union...

There is an agency for them... the INS.

While I agree that a functional government could take care of union functions with a lower level of collusion, what I really was pointing out is that the same people who claim that the government should stay out of everybody's business are those who, when it comes to their favorite enemy, invoke government as their advocate.

The point they keep forgetting is that unions exist so the government can stay out their business.