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.
Unions were originally created to protect WHITE JOBS from black and chinese labor that would do the work for less. They had NOTHING to do with working conditions and benefits. The phrase "Look for the union label" was to encourage people to buy goods from manufacturers that only employed whites.
Ummm, that's not the history I learned.
I don't know where you're getting your information. Labor History Timeline
The union had a lot to do with working condition and benefits.
From the little bit of reading since your post, it seems that there were problems with Chinese employment in Nevada and California. I also read that although Debs tried to get union members to include Blacks, the railroad workers refused to do so and had it written in their constitution.
(African Americans in the U.S. economy By Cecilia Conrad, pp 48-49)
You can't blame discrimination at that time on unions only. It was a deplorable part of US history, across the board. Hence the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
This doesn't mean that all unions used membership as a means to refuse employment to all Blacks and all Chinese.
I can't find anything to indicate that it was the case.
Ummm, that's not the history I learned.
I don't know where you're getting your information. Labor History Timeline
The union had a lot to do with working condition and benefits.
From the little bit of reading since your post, it seems that there were problems with Chinese employment in Nevada and California. I also read that although Debs tried to get union members to include Blacks, the railroad workers refused to do so and had it written in their constitution.
(African Americans in the U.S. economy By Cecilia Conrad, pp 48-49)
You can't blame discrimination at that time on unions only. It was a deplorable part of US history, across the board. Hence the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
This doesn't mean that all unions used membership as a means to refuse employment to all Blacks and all Chinese.
I can't find anything to indicate that it was the case.
You didn't learn the correct history. There used to be labels on union made stuff that said it was made by whites. That is how it all started, a good ole white boys club.
at one time PRIVATE sector unions had their place, and FDR encouraged PRIVATE sector unions. however FDR did NOT want public sector uninos because of the very thing that is going on in WI, and other states, right now. besides that, there is absolutely NO need for public sector unions since civil service laws cover government employees quite nicely thank you.
Hmmmm, FDR is dead.
It doesn't matter what he wanted.
That was mid last century.
at one time PRIVATE sector unions had their place, and FDR encouraged PRIVATE sector unions. however FDR did NOT want public sector uninos because of the very thing that is going on in WI, and other states, right now. besides that, there is absolutely NO need for public sector unions since civil service laws cover government employees quite nicely thank you.
And that has anything to do with trying to stop public employee unions from making crushing demands on the taxpayers who pay for them, how?
Your, "oh, look over there" deflection won't work. Public employee unions screw the taxpayersthat are forced to pay for their salaries and benefits, and more and more people are on to the scam.
I just did a look up of school teachers salaries in Wisconsin. I'm seeing people making 40-50K a year. Can you please describe what these "crushing" demands are? Holding on to their right to collective bargain is a "crushing" demand?
Where I come from we have real abuse of the system..police officers in my county make 1.5 times the median family income while contributing $0 to their pensions and medical. That is an out of whack system that places unfair demands on the taxpayer. Please explain to me how a school teacher making 45K a year is placing "crushing" demands on the system.
I just did a look up of school teachers salaries in Wisconsin. I'm seeing people making 40-50K a year. Can you please describe what these "crushing" demands are? Holding on to their right to collective bargain is a "crushing" demand?
Who's going to pay for that, dman? Do you really think WI taxpayers can cough up another $10.9 billion for the teachers right this minute? And guess what? That deficit will only continue to grow.
Who's going to pay for that, dman? Do you really think WI taxpayers can cough up another $10.9 billion for the teachers right this minute? And guess what? That deficit will only continue to grow.
The pension fund is underfunded..that doesn't mean that you have to cough it up RIGHT THIS MINUTE. Are they all retiring tomorrow?
I didn't forget their benefits. Considering that their salaries aren't really very impressive I'm assuming that one of the things that attracted them to the job was job stability and a pension. Now you're saying that state has screwed up and you have to take away their pensions. I'm sure there's some room for compromise, but it seems like it's the tea party Governor who doesn't want to budge...because it isn't about the budget, it's about destroying his political rivals.
The pension fund is underfunded..that doesn't mean that you have to cough it up RIGHT THIS MINUTE. Are they all retiring tomorrow?
Really dman? What's your plan for making up the $10.9 billion shortfall? Keep in mind that that deficit will increase as more teachers are added to the system, and as existing teachers' salaries increase meaning their pension benefit increases as well.
Quote:
I didn't forget their benefits. Considering that their salaries aren't really very impressive I'm assuming that one of the things that attracted them to the job was job stability and a pension. Now you're saying that state has screwed up and you have to take away their pensions. I'm sure there's some room for compromise, but it seems like it's the tea party Governor who doesn't want to budge...because it isn't about the budget, it's about destroying his political rivals.
Right.... Just ignore that 14.5 billion pound gorilla in the room ($3.6 billion budget deficit + $10.9 billion teachers' pension system deficit - and I haven't even gotten into the pension system deficits for all the other WI public employee unions).
Collective bargianig was not a mistake bu allowing the public unions to become such a influence in politcs for their own greed was. In many palce collective bargin has worked out fine . But when the unions such as in Wisconsin are allowed to ignore the purpose and not showup for work the reason it was started i the first place is corrupted;that is to avoid strike while allowing people to have contracts. IMO: they have nullify the contract that gave them contract rightsunder that contract.Basically unions have had a habiut of milking the cow dry without think of the consequences.
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.
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.
. Just ignore that 14.5 billion pound gorilla in the room ($3.6 billion budget deficit + $10.9 billion teachers' pension system deficit - and I haven't even gotten into the pension system deficits for all the other WI public employee unions).
