The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Thought I would throw this out there after discussing the replacement refs on another thread. Here is my take...

Not normally in favor of unions. As I said in the other thread, they are inflationary and are the cause of unsustainable "entitlements and pensions". IMO, their existence is no longer needed and serves as a detriment to most business models, esp. in the public sector. 

Union policies are solely based on seniority, including pay, promotion and reinstatement rights. Currently, a major holdup with the Chicago teachers is they are against using performance tests in evaluating teachers. Is that a good thing?

Unions also promote the "not my job" thinking and try to use their "cohesive power" to break or cripple a company or cause. Remember the air traffic controllers??? How about the teachers as I mentioned above?

I have worked along side union members and my experience is most will not do 1 single thing for the company outside a strict job description and will be the 1st to complain. My best friend was a quality engineer for G.M. in Kalamazoo, MI. for years and the joke among the employees were that G.M. stood for Generous Motors. Any prescription...2 bucks. No co-pay on doctor visits. 500 max out of pocket, free dental and vision, Matching 401K, pension plan and average pay of 25.00 an hour. Did I mention this was in the early to mid 80's???

Ok, go ahead...fire away. lol All in fun!

Agreed on just about everything. At one time unions filled a vital role in the workplace in the US and maybe in a few places they still fill that role, but everywhere that I have been associated with lately unions have caused more issues then they have solved. In fact I have known several people who were in unions that wished they didn't have to be in the union because of the problems it caused. They were forced to go on strike even though they didn't want to. Many long time union members are beyond reproach even though they are not top performers etc.

Coming from the part of the country I do I respect the place unions have in American history. That said, we are not in that same place anymore and union have run their course I am afraid.

My position has changed a bit....I don't see "unions" as a black or white issue...

I feel in the world today,a union needs to have a narrow focus,and National large unions are dinosaurs of our past...

A bus driver that can't be fired,even though he's got 2 DWI,and is still allowed to drive a bus....Makes me hate unions...

I admit,I've only had limited experiences with unions...

I feel when a union is limited to one place,one factory,it can be a good thing...I feel at a certain point/size the union becomes more about "the Union" than the workers/profession...

My example to small local union would be,I think having one Wal-mart store being a union because of it being located in a bad area,they don't want to be open 24 hours,etc,etc,etc...Isn't the bad thing....

I don't think all the Wal-mart stores should be Union,and there shouldn't be a national Wal-mart union...I think it's a bad thing...

Union Idea good,but reality bad in most cases...

The problems with unions is that they are run by people. They start out as a great idea and then people start abusing them and screw everything up. If we could take the human agenda out of it then everything would be fine.

I agree with Lil B, it's not a black and white issue.  Some unions are good, some are terrible.  It's a lot about the people that are heading the unions.  Also, after many years of being in a union AND working for a particular company, people become entrenched in their views, and aren't willing to make changes, but this happens in non-union professions too.

All good points.

Don't be naive. The unions still have power and powerful lobbyist. Can you believe they tried to sue Boeing and keep them from opening up a new production plant in South Carolina?  The union objected because S.C. is a right to work state, meaning you are not required to join or pay dues to the union as a condition of employment. Unreal!

I will even go as far to say unions "can be downright evil". Do you think the timing of the teachers going on strike on the 1st day of school was an accident?? Ditto for the refs in the NFL. The unions figured they had a gun to the heads of the NFL and the Mayor of Chicago.

As we see, Goodell stood his ground and Mayor Emanuel (former Chief of Staff for Obama) called them disgraceful for what they are doing to our children.   

The refs are locked out. They aren't on strike.

I think unions are an important and necessary component in counterbalancing the corporate overreach that the U.S. is sliding into.

It would be trivial for me to start listing off a bunch of examples of corporate management sticking it to the average workers; there's the economic stuff like H1-B visa abuse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh6OLUPSHyE), or the wanton disregard of safety regulations that lead to dozens of coal miners dying (http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2011/01/mine-safety-massey-msha).

When unions were strong, America had a broad and sturdy middle class.  In the post-Reagan era, as unions have been slowly and steadily dismantled, the nation has stratified; the middle class is steadily shrinking and the richest few are becoming richer and fewer.

I find the idea that "we no longer need unions any more" just as silly as if I were to say that we've already established that people have freedom of speech, so we really don't need that First Amendment.  Labor vs. management is not a single battle that is won by one side, then considered complete.  The same companies that you all are happy to claim have "learned their lesson" and "no longer need unions to keep them in check"... look how they act in countries like China where they have no such impediments.

Damn, for once I agree with spider. Unions have indeed been taken over and corrupted for the most part. However, these days hourly workers are paid barely a living wage while doing mostly all the work that keeps the company moving. While corporate officers and management live large with big salaries and bonuses while doing little next to nothing except raiding the coffers of the company. Unions should be available in every state and every company. In fact I think that a union rep should be required by federal law to visit large companies every year once or twice to let employees decide if they want to unionize. Face it, companies want to pay employees as little as possible. If they could pay Chinese wages in the US they would. The government should give some kind of incentives for paying employees more. Maybe for every dollar over minimum wage that they pay employee x, they get $1.01 in tax breaks or something like that.

I don't think you understand the free market system as well as you think. Unions are a core part of any free market. Just like company owners have the right in a free market to hire and fire. So do workers have the right to organize and leverage collective bargaining. Government has nothing to do with it.

I believe the system without unions you're actually thinking about is a form of corporatist fashism.

We already tried that during the Industrial Revolution.  I doubt many would agree that the experience of American workers in that era is the system "working perfectly."

I find it interesting that you said earlier that unions are "no longer needed."  If what you just said is true, and counterbalancing corporate power is "against every inkling that the Republic Free Enterprise System the United States stands for," then aren't you saying that unions were never needed?  That they have done nothing but ruin the system that would have worked perfectly otherwise?

I gave examples in the very next sentence: H-1B visa abuse and disregard for worker safety, among many other things.

I don't.  Which company are you a manager for?

Am I to take this to mean that you base your opinions solely on how it affects you personally?  Because I don't.

I could insert some quip here about your opinion of unions if a loved one had died in a refinery explosion at a site with hundreds of safety violations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_City_Refinery_explosion), but is it even necessary?

  Which company are you a manager for?

I am an entrepreneur with a couple of businesses that, built up and sold. Also have a few patents. For what that is worth, not a big deal.

Spider, the main thing is we both wish the best for this country. Admittingly, I am mostly conservative. I have a budget, stick to it and have a reserve. I invest well and do no live beyond my means. Can you say the same for this country? Do you honestly believe Obama has a plan to bring back prosperity and power this country needs to lead?

Forget the unions. Are you satisfied with what Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Barrack has done? If so, please tell me why and what they have done to make this country stronger.

By the way, how old are you? I am 53. I am guessing you are 19-25. Right?   

I am not so naive as to believe that any economic plan Obama may or may not have is particularly important, relative to what Congress is willing to pass.  I do think that had Obama actually been able to pass the initiatives he proposed during his 2008 campaign, we would be significantly better off than we are now.  And I thought that with the historic majorities in Congress he started out with, said initiatives would be fast-tracked to implementation (given the way that GWB's razor-thin majority romped and stomped their way through legislation in his first term).  Unfortunately, I significantly underestimated the... determination... of the GOP after such a sound thrashing.

So ultimately, I have learned my lesson; the GOP will likely be just as obstinate in a second Obama term as they were in the first.  But at least with Obama as president, I can feel confident that the Republican party will need an unachievable 2/3rds majority to pass their crazy legislation, and that the Supreme Court won't become an out-and-out rubber stamp of the most corporatist (and/or theocratic) policies imaginable.  So I pull my lever for Team Blue.

While I was willing to play along with your first irrelevant ad hominem comment about my supposed union membership, I'm not going to continue that trend.  Suffice it to say that you are wrong again; I joined this site in 2003, and I wasn't 10 years old when I signed up.  My age (or union membership) has nothing to do with the discussion, just as your position as management does not make you more (or less) qualified to opine on the value of unions.

I have no issue with most private unions as that is between the workers and the companies. They have to figure out how to work together or get hit by the global competition.
I have a big issue with many of the public unions, especially since they seem to breed more laziness and incompetence than they do excellence.

I can agree with that. That is unless you are G.M. and get big bailouts. Anyone want to buy my shares? 

While I agree that the gap in pay is very large, facts are against you here. I cannot think of a single large company (you and I both know we are not discussing small companies here) that starts employees at minimum wage. If they were willing to pay as little as possible that would be the starting point. Competition does not allow for them to do so. In order to get employees of a certain calibur, they pay more than that.

The wage gap is a tricky issue. Just part of the equation is cost of living of country, taxes, tariffs.... I have a good friend who is a tennis pro and has taught all over the world, including Indonesia. We ended up buying the remaining inventory of a line of shirts from Mambo. Granted, we got the shirts very reasonable, but was taxed to death bringing them in through Customs. He told me the textile industry was huge in Indonesia and the people made next to nothing for wages. Homes costs were also very low. How does the U.S. compete with that?

Here are the shirts...very cool!

 http://www.rubberchickenforthesoul.com/mamboloud.html

Unions are a necessity.  They are part of the balance.  Sure, there is corruption, just like in any organization of people.  But, without them, we end up getting paid in money that can only be spent at the company store and once you quit, your money is no good anymore.  This stuff actually happened, which was creating indentured servants.  Perhaps we wouldn't go back to that level, although it certainly is possible, but there has to be a constant struggle for things like working conditions, healthy working environments, etc.

^^^ Dave you are preaching to the choir. I grew up where that happened, it was my family that was forced to work in those conditions. If you honestly think unions are necessary now because of that you are mistaken. They were necessary but the government has passed laws against that now. It cannot happen with or without unions.

And while there may now be laws preventing those practices, the weight and lobbying power of the unions has to stand up to the weight and lobbying power of big business, in order to get those kinds of laws passed.

When you say that the government has passed laws against those things, do you mean laws like those that allow for unions to participate in collective bargaining?  You know, the laws that Republicans are striking from the books as fast as they can?

What the "unions are no longer needed" crowd seems to be missing is that when the unions have all been eliminated, there will be no political entity funneling money into the pockets of politicians on behalf of labor... only on behalf on corporations.  And as you should have seen recently, when corporatist politicians are elected into office, it is a trivial matter for them to simply rewrite the laws and undo all of the protections that unions have fought for.  (see: "right-to-work" states)

I find no small amount of irony in the fact that people are insisting that the union battles have already been permanently won at the exact same time that the right is systematically dismantling the gains from those battles.

I agree with you 100%. Like I said, if they could get away with it, they would pay as little as possible. Due to the reasons you stated, they can't easily get away with it. But to go one step further. Minimum wage isn't even worth discussing @ $15K a year before taxes.  In my area most companies starting pay is between $9-10/hr. So @ $9.50/hr the monthly pay before taxes would be approx. $1,650. Lets say net is 75% after taxes, insurance, and deductions. That leaves $1,237 a month to live on. So while the company is technically paying what looks like a good wage compared to minimum wage. The reality is that $1,200 a month is pretty much poverty level. There is so much of a gap in pay between the blue collar workers who are the backbone of the company and white collar and corporate workers who usually don't do much of anything.  Their should be a way that the government could offer incentives to companies for paying higher wages.

As long as its cheaper to manufacture outside of the U.S., we're fighting a losing battle. Global competition in retail is a good thing. Global competition for jobs, is a bad thing. That's the main reason why we are losing our middle class.