In The News Today...

Quote: AZDuffman

Unions long ago stopped being about their members.

Corporations started many of the manufacturing and textile unions themselves, see "A peoples history".

Quote:

Today they are about leftist fundraising and ground support.

Management, yeah. Like any extortion outfit, but no reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater. No one represents workers on a national level that I am aware of, and the workers are to busy trying to support themselves to pay attention so you can say they get the representation they deserve.

Quote:

Or when our store was closing. The new, nonunion owner had cashiers training two weeks before it closed, as well as had his family getting the store in order. Union was supposed to protect our jobs. Told us, "there is nothing we can do." Didn't even sent a rep out.

Yeah if you want a proper ***king, you need to be in a union for awhile. You won't hear me singing the praises of management. I just believe workers singularly can't stand up against the plutocracy, and can't compete with nepotism and sycophants. Nobody should have to kiss the bosses ass to keep a job. You are full aware that unions fight for open shop workers as well.

Quote:

Or when my dad's union went on strike. Supposed to be a strike fund. It was gone because Greyhound strikes ate it up, and the Greyhound union was crushed anyhow.

Yep, it is a struggle. Unions are miles away from perfection, but I think it would be a mistake to think just hard work will get a worker without connections proper recognition. I'm against slavery. You have never heard me support a living wage for flipping burgers, or the stuff you rail against. In my industry early last century the death rate on the job was 50%. You also know it is collective bargaining that has gotten working people holidays, safety, retirement etc. etc.. Look at the life of workers in country's without unions, Bangladesh perhaps? Is that the lifestyle you want for Americans?

Quote:

Or there is the SEIU who is supposed to negotiate for their members but spends a huge amount of their time paying for demonstrators for causes like a higher minimum wage, etc. How does that help the members?

At least they are doing something. I'm willing to be wrong and see workers lifted up with the new Admin.. There is billions of dollars allocated already for infrastructure, and Trump made a deal to let at least 450 billion some back ashore at a very low tax rate for that purpose, with matching funds.

Even Ross Perot said, "the tax's needed to pay the bills for this country can't come from minimum wage workers". Nothing is all good or all bad. It is easy to find fault with unions or union workers, but with unions representing less than 10% of the work force, all the wrongs in the country can't be their fault. Yeah, unions do some wrong headed stuff, and their management are often in it for themselves. The working class is in the same struggle them have fought for eons, to get a fair deal, and even the unions are screwing them. What's a boy to do?

Quote:

Sorry, unions are not helping anyone but Democrat politicians and causes. Often those causes are not what their members favor.

Separate their management from the workers. It is similar to hostile country's. The people don't want war, management does. Money in chaos. I have thought many times, being near the end of my life, how glad I am that I worked union. The right to work for less crowd somehow sees their lives being improved by not paying someone to represent them for better wages, conditions and retirement. I wish them luck. I have worked both sides as I've said before. On big projects [say a nuke] it is much simpler for management to only have to deal with a shop steward who controls his members, versus every single guy on the job coming in the office trying to bargain for a better deal.

Quote: petroglyph

No one represents workers on a national level that I am aware of, and the workers are to busy trying to support themselves to pay attention so you can say they get the representation they deserve.

Workers do not work on a national level. Pre-1984 the Bell System was probably the largest employer, they employed 1% of the private workforce. IOW, no need for "national" representation.

Quote:

In my industry early last century the death rate on the job was 50%. You also know it is collective bargaining that has gotten working people holidays, safety, retirement etc. etc.. Look at the life of workers in country's without unions, Bangladesh perhaps? Is that the lifestyle you want for Americans?

Some of the greatest safety innovations had nothing to do with unions. The air brake and modern RR coupler were both invented to make things safer, no union involvement. OTOH, the US Steel safety program was so draconian that managers had to come in on their days off to write violations. US Steel was heavy unionized and I have never once heard anyone union or not say it was a good place to work. Meanwhile, look at the "Best Places to Work" surveys, rarely are they unionized places.

Quote:

At least they are doing something. I'm willing to be wrong and see workers lifted up with the new Admin.. There is billions of dollars allocated already for infrastructure, and Trump made a deal to let at least 450 billion some back ashore at a very low tax rate for that purpose, with matching funds.

But that is not the job of a union. The SEIU is supposed to be collecting dues to collectively bargain. Not to promote a political agenda with forced dues.

If it wasn't for unions, I could put my 8 year old granddaughter in a sweatshop, instead of her lollygagging all day in school.

ALL WEALTH COMES FROM PAYING LABOR LESS THAN IT IS WORTH

Quote: buzzardknot

If it wasn't for unions, I could put my 8 year old granddaughter in a sweatshop, instead of her lollygagging all day in school.

What do you mean? She might not have a union card but there has to be an open shop around somewhere.

Quote: AZDuffman

What do you mean? She might not have a union card but there has to be an open shop around somewhere.

There will always be open shops and SCABS.

Quote: AZDuffman

Meanwhile, look at the "Best Places to Work" surveys, rarely are they unionized places.

.

Of course, a company run well enough doesn't need a union.

I think part of the problem is some people get locked in. They buy a home, their wife has a good job and doesn't want to leave, or their kids have to be uprooted from their friends and school, whereas a free soul can give the boss the finger and move on. Also divorces, second spouses and where most of your extended family lives can also be an issue.

'Cause I know some like to say, if your job is hell or doesn't pay well, you can move on easily and you don't need any bargaining power or a union. Or you should have trained in three or more alternate careers. Of course multiple skills may not even help if you don't live near a big city.

Edited, also the cost of living where you're moving can factor in, the size of the house you give up to live in another area... etc.,

Meanwhile, look at the "Best Places to Work" surveys, rarely are they unionized places.

Best place to work, no need for a union DUH

Worst places to work, no union. Double DUH

Quote: buzzardknot

ALL WEALTH COMES FROM PAYING LABOR LESS THAN IT IS WORTH

Labor is a commodity, nothing more. People get paid exactly what they're worth according to free market forces.

Quote: pew

Labor is a commodity, nothing more. People get paid exactly what they're worth according to free market forces.

Unless a union is restraining trade in labor of course.