- Joined
- Feb 3, 2017
- Messages
- 25,038
- Reaction score
- 14,284
- Location
- NY
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Other
Most union jobs were in manufacturing. With this wonderful 'global' economy, we no longer have much of that job share.
Most union jobs were in manufacturing. With this wonderful 'global' economy, we no longer have much of that job share.Notice a pattern??
Most union jobs were in manufacturing. With this wonderful 'global' economy, we no longer have much of that job share.
They will if they want to keep top tier employees.I've never had the opportunity to be a union member, but I know history. People have been claiming 'unions have outlived their usefulness' for as long as there have been unions.
Unions came to be and they exist today because employers will not typically do the right thing for their employees on their own.
I didn't say they should.Why should only manufacturing jobs be unionized?
Unions are a necessity. Our policies of the last few decades have led to the draining of wealth from the middle class and concentrating it into the upper class. One's labor is a commodity to be traded, and there's no issue with workers banding together to gain better leverage in contracting fair exchange for their labor.From the Teamsters president's speech and this tweet, I thought about this topic.
Now I'm not here to discuss whether you agree or not that Kinzinger is a "real Republican" but he is right in my recollection of Republican politics. Most republicans I have known are not pro-union and many are very anti-union. I myself, a former republican, am not pro-union. I get why people believe they are necessary, and for some companies they might be necessary, so I am not anti-union. My stance comes from 10 years as a union employee; my experience is that unions breed mediocrity in employees. I can't tell you how many bad coworkers I had that didn't care because they felt protected by the union.
So what is your stance? Pro-union? Not? Anti?
Because demand is high for good employees. If they want the best, they need to entice them.Why not? The owner class are just as likely to screw over labor than they were back 100 years ago.
Take the nonsense companies have to go through to get rid of bad employees, and I'm all for a union. I happen to like merit raises, but you don't get that with unions either.Unions are a necessity. Our policies of the last few decades have led to the draining of wealth from the middle class and concentrating it into the upper class. One's labor is a commodity to be traded, and there's no issue with workers banding together to gain better leverage in contracting fair exchange for their labor.
Can unions get "out of hand"? Yes, like anything, it can become corrupted and thus it's up to the people in the union to control it and ensure that its working for them. But they are still necessary in a system that has been more and more granting the power to the Corporate State. I think far more industries and jobs should be unionized.
Yep. I've seen that. Not married, but dating. The boss himself got his job because of his wife, who was the plant manager's assistant.Particularly if the lazy employee happens to be married to the boss's daughter.
Yeah... but what happens when demand isn't high?Because demand is high for good employees. If they want the best, they need to entice them.
And when things change, and jobs are scarce, the employers will screw the enticed workers by laying off their long term employees, many of which will have shown lots of company loyalty. They will dump the older employees to cut their health insurance expenses. They have to show maximum profits to their shareholders, and if a few thousand frontline employees have to be dismissed, so be it. Unions help the employees mitigate the fact that management sees them as nothing more than cogs in a machine, to be disposed of at will.Because demand is high for good employees. If they want the best, they need to entice them.
What purpose and/or place did they serve then, and why is it no longer useful?Nope. Unions had their place in the 40’s and 50’s.
Today though they have exceeded their usefulness.
Because demand is high for good employees. If they want the best, they need to entice them.
And who created those laws? That is an incredibly inane, uninformed and vacuous commentGovernment, with the creation and enforcement of various labor (worker protection) laws.
Seriously, you are using something from thirty five years ago as an argument today? They have nothing in common. Did you see any violence last year with all the strikes that happened? I saw union workers do better, that's what I saw. I do not grasp the reasoning that says the folks at the top can make almost obscene amounts of money but the people actually working the line or whatever they do shouldn't make a real livable wage, have a vacation, benefits, a chance to send you kid or kids to college but those at the top, no problemo.35 years isn't too long ago. And I'm sure there are many violent events that I don't know about.
35 years wasn't all that long ago.Seriously, you are using something from thirty five years ago as an argument today? They have nothing in common. Did you see any violence last year with all the strikes that happened? I saw union workers do better, that's what I saw. I do not grasp the reasoning that says the folks at the top can make almost obscene amounts of money but the people actually working the line or whatever they do shouldn't make a real livable wage, have a vacation, benefits, a chance to send you kid or kids to college but those at the top, no problemo.
Got any examples a bit more recent to back up your argument? In the men who built America, it was the company owner who hired armed men to break up a group of men who wanted a union using force and shooting a few people. Argue that, how some companies will use force to stop from becoming a union shop, it only happened over a hundred years ago.35 years wasn't all that long ago.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?