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.
I guess when Wal-Mart came to town and all the various mom and pop stores had to close, the people had to work somewhere. I'm sure there is not 1 worker in this whole country that wants to work for under $12/hour
Sure there is, the one who's been unemployed for the past year, whose house is about to foreclose, who is trying to put food on the table for the children. There are people desperate for a job, and if $11/hr is the pay, they'll take it.
Sorry, he's right. Unions suck. They are akin to communism.
I guess you should consider that if you support unions........
Are you a business owner? LOL My father says the same thing... the only reason I ask...
I am a teacher... I basically had to be in the union when I taught in order to save my own butt... not acceptable by the rest of the staff to NOT be in one... so I did it. Do I think there is a bunch of wishy washy nonsense involved? YES... but is it nice when you have an issue with the administration to have the Union back you up and sit next to you in that meeting... YES... You are dam*ed if you do and dam*ed if you don't....
Luckily I live in a right to work state, NC. Very little union, a whole lot of jobs. Most of my family that stayed up north in Ohio, and are in the unions, have a very poor economy and employment outlook. I am sure they had, and still in some areas, have their place, but I think their time is passing them by.
Who pays for Wal-Mart Watch and the other anti-Wal-Mart groups? Unions.
So even if your dues don't go to any political candidates, they do go toward a political agenda.
What's wrong with that? Any organization is gonna use politics to further it's interests, that's the way the game is played. Anybody that doesn't like the way union money is spent can run for election and change the policy if he wins.
I sat on my local's PAC and we decided how to spend the money we got from voluntary contributions from the members. I was ELECTED to that office.
Tell me, what about corporations that use stockholders money for political purposes? Is that OK? Should a corporation get permission from every stockholder before spending money on politics?
I don't have a problem with unions deciding to further a political agenda when they are open and above board about it and when the union members consent to their money being spent this way. I do have a problem when unions try to disguise their agenda. How many people who gleefully read about Wal-Mart Watch's attacks on Wal-Mart realize that Wal-Mart Watch is paid for by a union and isn't just a bunch of concerned citizens pitting themselves against a corporate giant? How many people know that Wake Up Wal-Mart is funded by the AFL-CIO? That's not a David going up against a Goliath, but that's the image that's been sold to the American public. People have been hand-fed the idea that Wal-Mart is evil and must be monitored, and these organizations are only interested in protecting the rights of the little guy, but it's a bit misleading. Because it's two powerful unions that have pitted their resources simultaneously against the corporation, and have coordinated a persuasive political campaign against a single business. So if your local wants to contribute to J Smith's campaign, as long as the local's members think it's good, then fine. Make the contribution, just not anonymously or with a made-up name.
Why is WM so worried about their employees unioninzing? If the employees are happy, loyal and successful, they'll never unionize. Are they afraid that maybe they feel differently?? Hmmm
It is time, considering the internationalization of commerce and industry, to resurrect the Industrial Workers of the World. We need to realize that commercial interests have always been anti-worker and anti-union and are now organized to further their self interest at the expense of most of us.
Now, who will join me in restarting the International Workers of the World? Rise up and join the Union. You have nothing to loose but the shackles placed on you by the international financiers.
Why is WM so worried about their employees unioninzing? If the employees are happy, loyal and successful, they'll never unionize. Are they afraid that maybe they feel differently?? Hmmm
If you were a business owner with almost 2 million employees, you'd be a little concerned about your employees unionizing. Regardless of how happy or unhappy employees are, unions cost businesses money. With that number of employees, unions could cost Wal-Mart a lot of money, millions of dollars every week. The new legislation isn't about saying hey, the majority of Wal-Mart employees want to unionize, so let's do it! It's about unions, facing dwindling memberships across the board, being able to compel the anti-union employees to declare their resistance publicly, to be able to identify the employees who don't want to unionize, to focus on them. Unions should be protecting employees' rights to privacy, not fighting to take it away.
Unions allow the employees to bite the hand that feeds them and it cripples huge companies till they get into a bind and start using terms like "needs of the business"
They can be wonderful for the workers....if you worked in a union you realize what I mean....the long lunch breaks the wonderfully long walks around the plant 60-80 hours a week at double and triple time...an almost impossible environment to get fired in....Yeah it's great for the workers...till the buildings close down for "need of the business" then how good was the union to you.
People should always have the urgency of being needed in a job.....when you become complacent in your position your work ethics deteriorate...Not to mention who wants' to hear for several years straight about how the place is closing down...it seemed like the biggest thing people were worried about at the few unions I have worked in were pensions and how much they were going to get paid when they finally shut the place down....It was like being at a 3 year funeral.
If you were a business owner with almost 2 million employees, you'd be a little concerned about your employees unionizing. Regardless of how happy or unhappy employees are, unions cost businesses money. With that number of employees, unions could cost Wal-Mart a lot of money, millions of dollars every week. The new legislation isn't about saying hey, the majority of Wal-Mart employees want to unionize, so let's do it! It's about unions, facing dwindling memberships across the board, being able to compel the anti-union employees to declare their resistance publicly, to be able to identify the employees who don't want to unionize, to focus on them. Unions should be protecting employees' rights to privacy, not fighting to take it away.
Hmm. If WM employees are treated fairly by EM, they won't feel the need to unionize. Isn't that a glaring case of the obvious? Now, if WM feels like the unions are, oh, I don't know, a threat ? to their relationship, I guess then they would want to boycott them, right? How can a union FORCE happy employees to join? I mean, if a union rep came to my workplace, we certainly wouldn't be interested.
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.
