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.
Taking your second point first, why aren't "unions needed these days?" Have employers become more enlightened or altruistic? Have they suddenly started to care about their worker's well being instead of their shareholders?
We now have OSHA, federal safety standards, labor laws, and an entire industry of attorneys who will work on contingency if you feel that your employer has slighted you in any way. The protections that the unions fought for are now in place. They have rendered themselves virtually obsolete.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech
In your first paragraph you refer to "the government steps in and places ridiculous constraints on the employer." What specific constraints can you name?
For example, if a union wants to try and organize your employees, you can do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to dissuade your employees from joining. They can hammer your employees 24/7 until they agree to sign up, but you can't put the same effort into talking them out of it.
The government handcuffs the employer when it comes to unions. There is very little that an employer can do in reaction to an attempted union takeover. That's wrong. The terms of employment between myself and an employee is just that - between myself and an employee, and if they want to talk to a union rep while off the clock, that's fine, but I should have the freedom to terminate them if I find out about it. As it stands now, I wouldn't be able to do that. That is pretty ridiculous.
The terms of employment between myself and an employee is just that - between myself and an employee, and if they want to talk to a union rep while off the clock, that's fine, but I should have the freedom to terminate them if I find out about it. As it stands now, I wouldn't be able to do that. That is pretty ridiculous.
You should NOT be able to fire them for that, as quite frankly, if you were able to do so, that would be the same thing as saying "All races were free to vote in Mississippi 50 years ago". In essence, you would be coercing votes in what should be a free election. Same as Mississippi's voter suppression of decades past.
Now you are free to call employee meetings and free to discuss many issues with them, and I agree fully with that. You are free to close up shop if you wish and I also agree with that. But you would not legally be able to open up a new corp in the same region with new staff doing the work of the closed corp, and I also agree with that.
IMO, while I'm not a union fan, as of now, we have the correct balance regarding what is legal and illegal during an election cycle. To think you need more safeguards has me questioning how employees are treated by you.
I agree, unless you go into engineering or the medical field, which are too stressful for many people (including myself). Otherwise thanks to wonderful globalization everyone else will be competing for scraps unless they can invent a cool app on the iphone everyone likes.
With that attitude, you are destined to a life of mediocrity.
You will be as successful as you want to be. If you want to be wealthy, you have to take the steps necessary to make that a reality. You don't get to walk from your commencement address to a corner office and a six figure salary, regardless of what your friends, parents, teachers or certain politicians might have told you. You have to EARN it.
It's because we DO need unions. I'm not saying unions are perfect but you're vastly underestimating the rights they have won for you.
Did you notice what you wrote there? Did you even catch that you were writing in the past tense?
"...they have won for you."
The time that we needed unions on a large scale is long passed. They have accomplished their goals. They have negated the need for their own existence.
So the question for all the union supporters to ask of the unions is, "What have you done for me lately?"
Why shouldn't workers have the right to band together and protect their interests? How does that violate any principle of economic freedom?
Damn good question. But then you're asking people who when Hostess went bankrupt they blamed it all on the people who had taken a pay cut (the union) while the ones who gave themselves hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses and pay raises they held them totally blameless
If unions were voluntary, I'd have no problem with them. However, in many places you are forced to join the union in order to get a job in the field in which you wish to work. I don't feel that being forced to do anything in order to obtain a job is a good thing.
They are voluntary. The workers take a vote and if they vote to have a union then they have a union
Damn good question. But then you're asking people who when Hostess went bankrupt they blamed it all on the people who had taken a pay cut (the union) while the ones who gave themselves hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses and pay raises they held them totally blameless
Did you forget the truckers featherbedding, not allowing 2 products on ONE truck per the contract?
Hostess had NO innocent people. All 18,000 sank the ship.
You should NOT be able to fire them for that, as quite frankly, if you were able to do so, that would be the same thing as saying "All races were free to vote in Mississippi 50 years ago". In essence, you would be coercing votes in what should be a free election. Same as Mississippi's voter suppression of decades past.
WTF are you talking about?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn
IMO, while I'm not a union fan, as of now, we have the correct balance regarding what is legal and illegal during an election cycle. To think you need more safeguards has me questioning how employees are treated by you.
I'm not sure what elections, or voting in Mississippi have to do with anything. This thread is about unions. Not sure how you got from A to B there, Bob.
Let's start again, because you simply weren't making any sense.
Just answer this: If an employee is conspiring to commit an act that will harm my business, why shouldn't I be legally allowed to terminate them for it?
Name three things you're forced to do by a third party in order to obtain a job. A corporation does not force you to join a union, the union does.
Note: Don't bother trying to claim that licensing, education, and certifications are forced upon you. These are voluntary things that you knowingly obtain.
So working for **** is better then being "forced" to join something that's going to make sure you make more. And why the hell does it have to be a "third party" to count? Unions aren't a third party anyway. Those union members are part of the company. They work there (or does being part of the company only apply when it's going under?)
So working for **** is better then being "forced" to join something that's going to make sure you make more. And why the hell does it have to be a "third party" to count? Unions aren't a third party anyway. Those union members are part of the company. They work there (or does being part of the company only apply when it's going under?)
It is absolutely worse when the net economy takes a significant hit because of the union. Unions are ways to inflate what the worker makes at the expense of net economic growth. They are selfish and shortsighted ways to make more money as a worker while punishing the overall economy.
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.
