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'll give you an example in microcosm of why I despise unions.
I was at a trade show in Chicago. We had a 10 x 10 display, the kind that popped out of a box and took literally five minutes to set up and plug in the fluorescent lights. A ninety-pound weakling could have done it. Hell, my six-year-old son could have done it.
But we couldn't do that. Why? Because the union wouldn't allow it. So we had to cool our heels for FIVE HOURS waiting on the union guy to wander over to our booth and set it up. Hell, we even had to tell the nitwit how to do it. THEN we had to wait on the union electrician for another two hours to walk over and PLUG IN THE DAMNED LIGHTS. I mean, I'm talking about one cord going into one socket. Meanwhile, the three of us are trying our best to arrange prospect meetings, etc., all the things that you're there at a trade show to do in the first place.
This has also been a HUGE problem in Philadelphia. There are organizations that will NOT come to Philly because of the union situation regarding conventions:
Quote:
The rules that govern workers at the Convention Center have long confounded planners wishing to bring their business to Philadelphia. Even those who have learned the byzantine code marvel at what it takes - and what it costs - just to set up and dismantle an exhibit.
Consider the ubiquitous laptop. If it is for personal use, an exhibitor can set it up. For audiovisual purposes, a member of the stagehands union must do the job, at $37 an hour. And if it is used to register conventioneers, the task falls to a union electrician, at $46 an hour.
Or consider the cost of a booth, the mainstay of conventions. When you add up everything, the work of a carpenter comes in at $107 an hour in Philadelphia - more than $24 higher than the national average and more costly than in Washington, Boston, Chicago, and Baltimore, according to a 2009 survey by an industry trade magazine.
As a union member I made about double what people doing the same work in anti-union states like Texas make and retired at 55 with a fully funded pension (the money already paid in, not promised) that pays me as much as working 40 hours a week.
If anyone can explain how that wasn't in my interest I'll call you Aristotle. Being a good conservative I don't give a damn if it's against somebody else's interest. Afterall, it's conservative theory, not liberal, that teaches the common good is furthered by everyone looking out for themself.
Unions are a mechanism by which market corrections are made and to be against unions is to be against the natural workings of the free market. It's also being against people's right to form associations to further their economic interest. Like people do when they form corporations.
I would think a true conservative would favor unions in theory even if he did have to wrangle with them day to day. But that's business, wrangling and arguing over a buck.
So by that logic, then you should have absolutely no objection to the same company moving the plant overseas to enjoy lower labor costs. Further, you should have no objection to Right To Work legislation that eliminates union memberships as a requirement of employment. Because if you really are a conservative, then you obviously object to the government getting into the middle of the compact between worker and management. Right?
As a union member I made about double what people doing the same work in anti-union states like Texas make and retired at 55 with a fully funded pension (the money already paid in, not promised) that pays me as much as working 40 hours a week.
If anyone can explain how that wasn't in my interest I'll call you Aristotle. Being a good conservative I don't give a damn if it's against somebody else's interest. Afterall, it's conservative theory, not liberal, that teaches the common good is furthered by everyone looking out for themself.
Unions are a mechanism by which market corrections are made and to be against unions is to be against the natural workings of the free market. It's also being against people's right to form associations to further their economic interest. Like people do when they form corporations.
I would think a true conservative would favor unions in theory even if he did have to wrangle with them day to day. But that's business, wrangling and arguing over a buck.
The first two websites I found neatly refuted your point, at least in the auto industry when it comes to salary.
Even if Honda is only paying $42.95 an hour in total wages and benefits, it still adds up to north of $85,000 in total compensation a year. That's not bad for slapping fenders onto cars.
So by that logic, then you should have absolutely no objection to the same company moving the plant overseas to enjoy lower labor costs. Further, you should have no objection to Right To Work legislation that eliminates union memberships as a requirement of employment. Because if you really are a conservative, then you obviously object to the government getting into the middle of the compact between worker and management. Right?
Plants are moving regardless of whether I approve or not. Note that businesses that moved from the North to the South for lower labor costs are now moving to Asia for the same reason. Even non union Americans can't work cheap enough to satisfy many businessmen.
I object to so called "right to work" legislation because it's a government interference with the right of people to make contracts and the right of a business to set conditions of employment.
The first two websites I found neatly refuted your point, at least in the auto industry when it comes to salary. ...
Even if Honda is only paying $42.95 an hour in total wages and benefits, it still adds up to north of $85,000 in total compensation a year. That's not bad for slapping fenders onto cars.
Note that non union auto plants must pay high wages to avoid being organized by a union. Thus non union workers benefit by the existence of unions. I think if the unions weren't around wages for non union autoworkers would be lower than they are.
What an autoworker makes is no business of mine and I'm happy to see some of my fellow countrymen are making such a good living.
Plants are moving regardless of whether I approve or not. Note that businesses that moved from the North to the South for lower labor costs are now moving to Asia for the same reason. Even non union Americans can't work cheap enough to satisfy many businessmen.
I object to so called "right to work" legislation because it's a government interference with the right of people to make contracts and the right of a business to set conditions of employment.
A bit of jujitsu on your part. If you are such a huge advocate of unions, then you must agree with their opposition to manufacturing leaving the country. Please pick one position or another.
As a union member I made about double what people doing the same work in anti-union states like Texas make and retired at 55 with a fully funded pension (the money already paid in, not promised) that pays me as much as working 40 hours a week.
If anyone can explain how that wasn't in my interest I'll call you Aristotle. Being a good conservative I don't give a damn if it's against somebody else's interest. Afterall, it's conservative theory, not liberal, that teaches the common good is furthered by everyone looking out for themself.
Unions are a mechanism by which market corrections are made and to be against unions is to be against the natural workings of the free market. It's also being against people's right to form associations to further their economic interest. Like people do when they form corporations.
I would think a true conservative would favor unions in theory even if he did have to wrangle with them day to day. But that's business, wrangling and arguing over a buck.
clearly the unions getting special favors from the government at the EXPENSE OF EVERY OTHER WORKING AMERICAN do not fall into the category of natural workings of the free market. unions which receive taxpayer funded bailouts sure as heck do not fall into that category. what is going to happen if GM can't make its VEBA payments?
look at the unions exempt from obamacare that the rest of america has to pay for.
tell me how these unions are ANY different in terms of rent seeking compared to the corporations you are complaining about? they are a special interest group complaining about another special interest group, and the rest of us get squeezed in the middle.
that's the problem for most americans now, getting squeezed by all the special interest groups in collusion with the government.
one thing the unions and government have in common, though, is that they do not trust people with their own money so they take some to see that it is "properly" spent.
one more thing, even worse than all of this rent seeking is what the federal reserve DID. they took ALL the money that people have earned, saved, worked for, etc. and they DEVALUED it:
"Creating money" is nothing more than diluting the existing stock of money- the biggest crime inflicted on the american people.
Last edited by floridasandy; 04-10-2011 at 06:53 PM..
Actually, this is very much both politics and economics. But the main reason for union bashing is wage jealousy and Republican rhetoric . The Republicans know that the unions and democrats have had a symbiotic relationship for years and they recognize that they can influence elections in a major way by destroying unions. Secondly, companies like GM have been blaming terrible management and faulty planning on the folks who install the door handles for years. For 20 years GM management only excelled at one thing: making PPT presentation that blamed their failings on the union.
My main issue with unions is many think they are entitled to the job and also to higher pay. In many cases this results into the unskilled worker being paid the same as a higher skilled worker. Basically not much different when the teacher has to teach down to the least intelligent or the kid that doesn't care.
People have the right to work but shouldn't have the entitlement of a job.
A bit of jujitsu on your part. If you are such a huge advocate of unions, then you must agree with their opposition to manufacturing leaving the country. Please pick one position or another.
I don't have to agree with everything anybody says; unions or anybody else. However I do think Americans ought to keep their production (and white collar work as well) in The United States. Let's call it the price American businessmen have to pay for enjoying the fruits of living here. We could also call it patriotism and love of country.
My main issue with unions is many think they are entitled to the job and also to higher pay. In many cases this results into the unskilled worker being paid the same as a higher skilled worker .
Most people think they're entitled to higher pay; it's a natural enough human trait. Such as people who think their job takes more skill and therefore they're entitled to more money than someone with (what they consider) lesser skill, even if the market doesn't agree.
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.
