U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > Kansas City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-27-2012, 08:02 AM
 
266 posts, read 473,173 times
Reputation: 229

Advertisements

So as I work at the Grandview Triangle now, at first I would drive on 95th in Missouri and see a ton of striking union thugs at the federal complex, and of course yell at them to get back to work.

But now it seems, as the new police station is under construction, there are strikers here yet again. Their signs are impossible to read as it's tiny print, but what's with all the striking unions on the MO side?

It seems this too would be a motivation for some bosses to want to move their businesses to right to work states (KS,TX,etc.).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-27-2012, 08:25 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
10,705 posts, read 18,504,291 times
Reputation: 5415
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason87x View Post
So as I work at the Grandview Triangle now, at first I would drive on 95th in Missouri and see a ton of striking union thugs at the federal complex, and of course yell at them to get back to work.

But now it seems, as the new police station is under construction, there are strikers here yet again. Their signs are impossible to read as it's tiny print, but what's with all the striking unions on the MO side?

It seems this too would be a motivation for some bosses to want to move their businesses to right to work states (KS,TX,etc.).
It's not just MO.

Report: GM workers vote to authorize strike in Kansas City, Kan. - Kansas City Business Journal

I personally don't understand unions and they are often shooting themselves in the foot.

I know somebody that works for the nucluer plant that is moving from the bendix site on bannister to the new facility near Grandview. He's not part of that specific union and didn't strike, but he said that the people went on strike not even knowing the risk. They were just told to by their union "leaders" and so they did. Well, when they went back to work the deal they ended up getting was not near as good as the original offer from the company. When the union decided to go on strike, the company said fine, they will play hard ball and the union screwed its employees.

In this economy to choose to go on strike for some of the stupid little reasons they get all worked up over is pretty asinine, but I would hardly call them thugs.

Last edited by kcmo; 01-27-2012 at 08:49 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2012, 08:25 AM
 
Location: IN
20,170 posts, read 34,496,158 times
Reputation: 12508
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason87x View Post
So as I work at the Grandview Triangle now, at first I would drive on 95th in Missouri and see a ton of striking union thugs at the federal complex, and of course yell at them to get back to work.

But now it seems, as the new police station is under construction, there are strikers here yet again. Their signs are impossible to read as it's tiny print, but what's with all the striking unions on the MO side?

It seems this too would be a motivation for some bosses to want to move their businesses to right to work states (KS,TX,etc.).
I'm not a big union person, but I think it is uncalled for to yell at workers as that only provokes more problems in general. Your broad brush argument that "RTW" states are doing so much better is a falsehood. Many of those states have far higher unemployment rates, far lower median incomes, very unhealthy populations, and low educational attainment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2012, 08:38 AM
 
Location: Tower Grove East, St. Louis, MO
12,064 posts, read 27,216,465 times
Reputation: 3739
Thugs, seriously?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2012, 09:06 AM
 
2,195 posts, read 2,147,204 times
Reputation: 1916
I'm a union member, and strongly pro-union. Unions aren't screwing their members. Unions are democratically controlled organizations and their leaders make the best decisions they are authorized to by their membership. Slurs like "union thugs" and "union bosses" are made up by the people who profit most from workers not being organized.

Frankly, the reason so many unions are authorizing job actions right now is that decades of anti-union federal and state policies have weakened the rights of workers, and the legislative crippling of organized labor is the primary reason for the growing wealth disparity in our country, which affects all workers.

Whether or not you know it, striking workers are basically carrying the load for the unorganized working class. They are not "thugs", they are taxpaying American citizens who are making pretty harsh sacrifices to exercise their right to a voice in their workplace. And when they win gains in power and rights and benefits in their workplaces, we all reap the trickle-down benefits.

To yell at a striking worker, when you don't even know what the strike is about is disgraceful, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

And if you knew anything about so-called "right-ro-work" legislation, you'd be a fool to support it. It doesn't attract companies, look at the data for Oklahoma, which was the most recent ('01) state to go to enact "right-to-work". "Right-to-work" doesn't actually provide any work or any rights even. Quite the opposite. It imposes regulations on the market and seeks to make it harder to organize or operate a labor union. What the legislation actually does is require unions to represent workers who refuse to join or pay their fair share, interferes with mutually negotiated employer-employee contracts, gives your boss the right to fire you without due process for any reason not protected by federal discrimination laws, and makes dues collection anachronistically difficult, all in an attempt to weaken unions. Companies know that less unionism in a state = lower wages for all workers, less benefits for workers, less insurance, less vacation, fewer retirement options, etc.

But that doesn't mean more jobs, because lower unionism also means less worker input on work rules and that means that as your wages fall, your productivity will be expected to increase. So for 2/3rds of the money, you get to do twice as much work, and corporate hierarchies get to pocket the difference. The economy in right-to-work states isn't exactly booming, and those employed make significantly less than those in right-to-negotiate states.

So:

If your goal is to have lower wages, then right-to-work is for you.

If your goal is to bite the hand that feeds you, keep yelling citizens excercising the constitutional right to concerted action.

Enjoy the 3rd world future.

Last edited by SPonteKC; 01-27-2012 at 09:20 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2012, 09:13 AM
 
Location: Tower Grove East, St. Louis, MO
12,064 posts, read 27,216,465 times
Reputation: 3739
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.davis View Post
If your goal is to have lower wages, then right-to-work is for you.
Amen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2012, 09:50 AM
 
266 posts, read 473,173 times
Reputation: 229
Okay then. I'll leave for Texas soon.

Actually, I was just curious as to why and what their motivations are. While I'm against the heavy unionization that drives up costs and quality down, I'm sorry if my initial post came off as flamebaiting. I think kcmo had the most informative answer here.

As far as GraniteStater's comment about rtw states' lower stats, I think that's because the high cost of living in places like CA has weeded out people who couldn't afford it, who moved to cheaper rtw states, along with the companies as well. So technically yea some states in the NE may have higher income stats and similar, but most likely for fewer people, many working for companies that the government favors. For example, my aunt earns a killing in Chicago, but it would be almost impossible for younger me, not connected there, to replicate the same. Hence why I live and work here in the KC area, and may consider TX in a few years.

On top of that, I consider it very rude to strike, especially given this extremely tough economy. I'm very thankful to have a job.

Last edited by jason87x; 01-27-2012 at 10:00 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2012, 10:15 AM
 
Location: Tower Grove East, St. Louis, MO
12,064 posts, read 27,216,465 times
Reputation: 3739
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason87x View Post
Okay then. I'll leave for Texas soon.

Actually, I was just curious as to why and what their motivations are. While I'm against the heavy unionization that drives up costs and quality down, I'm sorry if my initial post came off as flamebaiting. I think kcmo had the most informative answer here.

As far as GraniteStater's comment about rtw states' lower stats, I think that's because the high cost of living in places like CA has weeded out people who couldn't afford it, who moved to cheaper rtw states, along with the companies as well. So technically yea some states in the NE may have higher income stats and similar, but most likely for fewer people, many working for companies that the government favors. For example, my aunt earns a killing in Chicago, but it would be almost impossible for younger me, not connected there, to replicate the same. Hence why I live and work here in the KC area, and may consider TX in a few years.

On top of that, I consider it very rude to strike, especially given this extremely tough economy. I'm very thankful to have a job.
Yes, we should all be genuflecting to our overlords instead. How magnanimous of them to allow us to have jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2012, 10:16 AM
 
Location: IN
20,170 posts, read 34,496,158 times
Reputation: 12508
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason87x View Post
As far as GraniteStater's comment about rtw states' lower stats, I think that's because the high cost of living in places like CA has weeded out people who couldn't afford it, who moved to cheaper rtw states, along with the companies as well. So technically yea some states in the NE may have higher income stats and similar, but most likely for fewer people, many working for companies that the government favors. For example, my aunt earns a killing in Chicago, but it would be almost impossible for younger me, not connected there, to replicate the same. Hence why I live and work here in the KC area, and may consider TX in a few years.
On the other hand, one can't glean to much from state by state differences as the rate of union membership has decreased to such a low level. States like Michigan and Ohio have suffered large-scale losses due to the huge restructuring of the auto industry, etc. Other states have small populations, a very small percentage of the population that is union, and higher incomes and educational attainment. These states are structured and positioned themselves to retain and attract businesses that hire high skilled and high paid workers. That is just one example of why cost of living is higher in certain places. The other factor is many places are built out and have less room for uncontrolled sprawl on "cheap" farmland. So, while you may be correct on migration patterns to RTW states like Texas, most are mainly moving due to a higher quantity of jobs that pay lower wages. Texas has very high property taxes and electricity costs so I think the low COL there is exaggerated. However, I will agree that the younger population demographic will tend to move away from high COL and high tax areas unless they have a very high paying position themselves. This has become more apparent in states like CA, CT, NJ, MA, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2012, 12:30 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
7,656 posts, read 5,643,038 times
Reputation: 7505
It is reprehensible what big business has done to the living standard expectation for our nation going forward. Whatever crippling of worker's right and living standard not done by legislation has been done by exploitation of overseas outsourcing and illegal immigrant labor. Thus the sad reality is that unions are largely powerless in this new game where business holds all the cards.

It never occurred to those of us in high school in the 60s that we were living what would be the few short years of America's peak. But given the steep downward slope that began in the Reagan years, today that sad reality seems clear as a bell.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > Kansas City
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top