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.
No industry ever died because of bad unions. Management makes the critical decisions. Good management doesn't end up with intractable union problems. Bad management frequently has difficult union problems.
Unions are interested in keeping jobs because it is how you get dues. Every time a job is lost, so is a membership. It does the union no good to bankrupt the company, but what I have seen is that when management has made a decision to close a plant or a division, they stop weeding out the bad workers because it takes some effort to fire people in a contract situation, but it can and is done in good management. Bad workers hurt their fellow workers, but it is easy to blame the workers vs the managers who are planning the work flow, etc.
No industry ever died because of bad unions. Management makes the critical decisions. Good management doesn't end up with intractable union problems. Bad management frequently has difficult union problems.
No. I think most plants that have closed because of unions is because the unions were too good at what they do, namely forcing the company to enact unreasonable regulations, benefits, and/or compensations. This has happened in our area with the textile industry.
I meet a pretty sizable number of achievers every day. I've yet to meet even one who has told me that he or she became an achiever because the people around him or her were working so hard at achieving, but that if those folks had ever let down for a minute, they themselves would have gladly sat on their fat duffs and done nothing as well. That's just not part of my experience on the planet, but apparently there are some others who have run into it quite a lot...
Forgive me but I doubt that you've actually engaged these "achievers" about why they have achieved or that they've volunteered the information. Certainly many of the over-achievers have done so in spite of the actions of others, yet the marginal achievers would the ones for concern. These are the ones who are willing to work hard but yet feel they are being taken advantage of and justify themselves slacking off.
No. I think most plants that have closed because of unions is because the unions were too good at what they do, namely forcing the company to enact unreasonable regulations, benefits, and/or compensations. This has happened in our area with the textile industry.
So you have bad management and negotiators, and this is the Union's fault?
Forgive me but I doubt that you've actually engaged these "achievers" about why they have achieved or that they've volunteered the information.
Guess you don't know much about us achievers. A lot of times, a few of us will take a quick timeout to go share a beer or two, and doesn't somebody go and answer his cellphone. Bob! Can't you give it a rest for 30 minutes??? Well, that just opens the door to the whole nine yards of how and why we all came to be achievers, and I'm telling you, not once has anybody said "Because everybody else seemed to be doing it."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaznjohn
Certainly many of the over-achievers have done so in spite of the actions of others, yet the marginal achievers would the ones for concern. These are the ones who are willing to work hard but yet feel they are being taken advantage of and justify themselves slacking off.
Oh. So it's only the marginal achievers that we need to worry about. Maybe just the super-sensitive marginal achievers, at that. The ones who would really, really like to work hard but will still take any sort of perceived slight or injustice as a perfectly good reason to shut down and sulk for the duration. Just how marginal ARE the achievements of this group, would you say...
I don't have any trouble understanding. Poor management and the ability to exploit foreign workers.
Yup, you can cover up a lot of ineptitude or criminality or what have you just by playing the numbers that spell the difference between the mobility of capital and the mobility of labor...
So you have bad management and negotiators, and this is the Union's fault?
Yes. It's the union's fault for extorting management into capitulation through the threat of a work stoppage. Much of the blame must also be placed upon the U.S. government which has allowed this to happen. If an employee doesn't agree with the benefits and/or compensation provided in the employment contract, then he/she should apply for a job somewhere else. In other contracts, the parties in the contract aren't allowed to change the specifications during performance of the contract, why should employees be able to do so?
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.
