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.
So much for the "strong" middle class in RTW states...
Do you understand what that graph says? Unions don't ruin business. They act on behalf of the workers to get a FAIR share of the pie. How is it that we're seeing record levels of profit, records levels of executive pay, yet middle-class & lower-class wages have stagnated or dropped?
How is it that in a productive economy the workers aren't getting a share of the spoils? B/c they have no voice w/o unions. They have to rely on the mercy of their employers to throw them extra crumbs.
But you are not looking at the entire picture here.
What if a state is an agricultural state ?
It's the types of jobs as well.
You may be jumping to the wrong conclusions here based on a sampling of data which is incomplete.
Texas is not a FIRE state; it's agricultural and commodities.
I was in the Electrical Union in NJ when I worked during summer break while I was in college. We had mandatory breaks and could not lift a finger on the jobsite before 7am or after 3pm. We literally had to stop what we were doing at 3pm. God forbid you worked an extra 15 minutes to finish something. What pisses me off is the hoops one has to go through to fire someone. There were some excellent employees and there were some bad ones. Nothing different than any other employer/employment. However, constant lateness, willfull neglect, below-minimal performance would not get you fired. It was very unfair to the business owner because the union would swoop in and protect the guy. Ridiculous.
How is it that in a productive economy the workers aren't getting a share of the spoils? B/c they have no voice w/o unions. They have to rely on the mercy of their employers to throw them extra crumbs.
Um, no. That's now how a free market works.
Labor is bought and sold just like everything else. Employees do not rely on the mercy of their employers. They rely on the market value of their labor.
They aren't getting a "share of the spoils" because they are not investors. Investors get a share of the spoils. Investors don't get paychecks. Workers don't get a share of the spoils. Workers do get paychecks.
Workers do not share share in the risks, so they do not share in the spoils. Instead, they get paid for their services according to what their skills are worth on the open market. Simple and fair.
kkaos2"Workers do not share share in the risks, so they do not share in the spoils. Instead, they get paid for their services according to what their skills are worth on the open market."
Excellent post, with your most important point copied above.
I was in the Electrical Union in NJ when I worked during summer break while I was in college. We had mandatory breaks and could not lift a finger on the jobsite before 7am or after 3pm. We literally had to stop what we were doing at 3pm. God forbid you worked an extra 15 minutes to finish something. What pisses me off is the hoops one has to go through to fire someone. There were some excellent employees and there were some bad ones. Nothing different than any other employer/employment. However, constant lateness, willfull neglect, below-minimal performance would not get you fired. It was very unfair to the business owner because the union would swoop in and protect the guy. Ridiculous.
But union supporters know that what you say is right, however, they will tear into you for saying it. They are a dying breed unless they keep Obama and his kind of people in office a few more years. NJ is still union shop, isn't it?
And with all due respect, if things keep going the way they're going, those "resonable labor laws" and balance between labor and employers will be swept aside, and die away. I'm not really a union guy, and I understand why people support right to work, but I do understand that they have played an important role in the rise of the middle class and giving workers some kind of dignity. I also believe that the only motivation that Indiana Republicans have behind this is to cripple a political foe.
I often hear the argument that "unions were useful once , but now they're not needed." I disagree. I'd sure like to know who exactly would support the rights of workers once unions are gone. Because it certainly won't be any business owner, that's for sure.
Welcome to the Gilded Age, part II
For not being a 'union guy', you sure sound like a union guy. Where I live there are State Wage & Hour Inspectors who will make sure an employer is paying what he is supposed to be paying employees and that no one is working more than 40 hours a week without getting overtime pay. The problem with unions is they affect other jobs as well. My son has to pay 'prevailing wages' on some jobs because of the unions. In the end unions cause some construction jobs to cost a great deal more than they should. Any school construction where I live comes under the Davis Bacon Act, the school ends up costing much more and non-union workers must be paid more than they normally work for, so most of the time, fewer workers are used.
kkaos2"Workers do not share share in the risks, so they do not share in the spoils. Instead, they get paid for their services according to what their skills are worth on the open market."
What risk does the CEO take to justify lavish compensation? If his/her plans go sour, there's a nine figure golden parachute waiting. The workers, they all lose their jobs. Sounds like the workers are taking plenty of risk, without getting a say and without being compensated for their risk.
What risk does the CEO take to justify lavish compensation? If his/her plans go sour, there's a nine figure golden parachute waiting. The workers, they all lose their jobs. Sounds like the workers are taking plenty of risk, without getting a say and without being compensated for their risk.
Then those workers need to find new jobs or become CEOs themselves.
No one is forcing anyone to work for slave wages. No one is chained to their job.
And there are plenty of CEO's that take risks to turn a failing company around.
Lou Gerstner is one example and he did a fine job with IBM.
To bring in the best you have to offer them something.
You cannot just plop a body in a seat and call him a CEO. You seem to think they do nothing at all except to collect salary and stock bonuses.
Then those workers need to find new jobs or become CEOs themselves.
No one is forcing anyone to work for slave wages. No one is chained to their job.
And there are plenty of CEO's that take risks to turn a failing company around.
Lou Gerstner is one example and he did a fine job with IBM.
To bring in the best you have to offer them something.
You cannot just plop a body in a seat and call him a CEO. You seem to think they do nothing at all except to collect salary and stock bonuses.
The point that you apparently missed was that bobtn was claiming that workers do not take any risks, and therefore, aren't entitled to any 'spoils.' I am contending that they are taking risks. They risk their job when the CIO, who is indemnified from failing, wants to make a name for himself.
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.
Indiana right to work legislation signed into law
