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.
And now they're crushing taxpayers (lower, middle, and upper) with outrageous benefits. In addition, good, young teachers are losing their job thanks to the tenure system. This year, a teacher's future will be decided by the flip of a coin at the high school my mother works at.
No need for the hyperbole. There are numerous laws on the books that will continue to protect workers.
Remember, liberals dont care about the tax payer. They are the tax and spend party. They are the "rich are evil", unless they are George Soros type/hollywood type, but Unions and their money laundering are GOOD.
The fastest way to crippling this country is more taxes, continued power to Unions, or at least that will help their "cause".
Worst part about Unions, especially public ones, its hard to fire anyone. Bad teachers get to keep teaching and reap the benefits as the good teachers.
One think I will say. I think if Unions have to give up a lot, and trust me I do believe they need to be cut down to size, but I think Politicians should have to pay as well.
Correct me if Im wrong, but dont many Politicians get benefits for life even if they just do one term? If that is true, then it shouldnt be and needs to be changed. How much do politicians have to pay toward their benefits? And hell, they are basically like unions in many ways. They even get to vote for their own raises and they are already over paid as is.
Im all for this Union crack down, but damn it. I want the Politicians to have to pay as well. It sickens me to think of these clowns getting these benefits no matter how much time they do or how bad they are at what they do.
Here's the thing. The Left is trying to make this into their usual "haves" vs "have nots". Notice how they are trying to bring the Koch brothers into this. But it doesnt work. This is the Unions versus the middle class. The middle class who are not in unions suffer. WE have to pay for ludicrous benefits and pensions. Our taxes go up, partly because Unions dont have to give in
Yep, the unions are making a HUGE mistake by pitting themselves against the middle class. They're DONE.
Before Unions, there was a small middle class. Unions gave us the 40 hour work week, overtime, equal rights, civil rights, workman's compensation, work area safety and got rid of child labor.
The GOP would love to go back to the 1890's and 80 hour work weeks, child labor, etc.
Best post on this thread...You anti union folks don't even know that you are shooting yourself in the foot...If you are middle class or lower, it doesn't matter where you work, unions had a lot to do with how much you earn and the conditions you work in...Be prepared for less pay (about 20% less) and shoddier conditions if the unions disappear.
A little history....
Women working under sweat shop conditions organized the first union in the early 19th century. According to the book American Labor, in 1834-1836 women worked 16–17 hours a day to earn $1.25 to $2.00 a week. A girl weaver in a non-union mill would receive $4.20 a week versus $12.00 for the same work in a union mill. The workers had to buy their own needles and thread from the proprietor. They were fined for being a few minutes late for work. Women carried their own foot treadle machines or were held in the shops until the entire shop had completed an immediate delivery order. Their pay was often shorted, but a protest might result in immediate dismissal. Sometimes whole families worked from sun up to midnight. Pulmonary ailments were common due to dust accumulation on the floors and tables. Some shops had leaks or openings in the roofs, and workers worked in inclement weather.
Despite the odds, some women challenged the employers. Their first organization was as an auxiliary, the Daughters of Liberty in 1765. In 1825, the women organized and called themselves the United Tailoresses of New York. Strikes occurred over the years, and some were successful.
Best post on this thread...You anti union folks don't even know that you are shooting yourself in the foot...If you are middle class or lower, it doesn't matter where you work, unions had a lot to do with how much you earn and the conditions you work in...Be prepared for less pay (about 20% less) and shoddier conditions if the unions disappear.
A little history....
Women working under sweat shop conditions organized the first union in the early 19th century. According to the book American Labor, in 1834-1836 women worked 16–17 hours a day to earn $1.25 to $2.00 a week. A girl weaver in a non-union mill would receive $4.20 a week versus $12.00 for the same work in a union mill. The workers had to buy their own needles and thread from the proprietor. They were fined for being a few minutes late for work. Women carried their own foot treadle machines or were held in the shops until the entire shop had completed an immediate delivery order. Their pay was often shorted, but a protest might result in immediate dismissal. Sometimes whole families worked from sun up to midnight. Pulmonary ailments were common due to dust accumulation on the floors and tables. Some shops had leaks or openings in the roofs, and workers worked in inclement weather.
Despite the odds, some women challenged the employers. Their first organization was as an auxiliary, the Daughters of Liberty in 1765. In 1825, the women organized and called themselves the United Tailoresses of New York. Strikes occurred over the years, and some were successful.
Nice fear tactic, but there's this thing called the minimum wage and federal/state laws that protect workers. Unions once served a purpose, but now they're the problem, not the solution. A reduction in the power of public worker unions will not put us back to 1807.
Best post on this thread...You anti union folks don't even know that you are shooting yourself in the foot...If you are middle class or lower, it doesn't matter where you work, unions had a lot to do with how much you earn and the conditions you work in...Be prepared for less pay (about 20% less) and shoddier conditions if the unions disappear.
A little history....
Women working under sweat shop conditions organized the first union in the early 19th century. According to the book American Labor, in 1834-1836 women worked 16–17 hours a day to earn $1.25 to $2.00 a week. A girl weaver in a non-union mill would receive $4.20 a week versus $12.00 for the same work in a union mill. The workers had to buy their own needles and thread from the proprietor. They were fined for being a few minutes late for work. Women carried their own foot treadle machines or were held in the shops until the entire shop had completed an immediate delivery order. Their pay was often shorted, but a protest might result in immediate dismissal. Sometimes whole families worked from sun up to midnight. Pulmonary ailments were common due to dust accumulation on the floors and tables. Some shops had leaks or openings in the roofs, and workers worked in inclement weather.
Despite the odds, some women challenged the employers. Their first organization was as an auxiliary, the Daughters of Liberty in 1765. In 1825, the women organized and called themselves the United Tailoresses of New York. Strikes occurred over the years, and some were successful.
and just what does all that have to do with people loosing their homes because of outrageous property taxes to pay for public employees unions getting basically free pensions and health care!
Remember, liberals dont care about the tax payer. They are the tax and spend party. They are the "rich are evil", unless they are George Soros type/hollywood type, but Unions and their money laundering are GOOD.
The fastest way to crippling this country is more taxes, continued power to Unions, or at least that will help their "cause".
Come to New Jersey. Our state, among others, is already crippled by the unions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucsLose
Worst part about Unions, especially public ones, its hard to fire anyone. Bad teachers get to keep teaching and reap the benefits as the good teachers.
Its just wrong and is partly why our education system is going down the toilet.
Nice fear tactic, but there's this thing called the minimum wage and federal/state laws that protect workers. Unions once served a purpose, but now they're the problem, not the solution. A reduction in the power of public worker unions will not put us back to 1807.
Minimum wage is a joke...Would you work for minimum? Wait... perhaps you do...Can you live on it?
and just what does all that have to do with people loosing their homes because of outrageous property taxes to pay for public employees unions getting basically free pensions and health care!
Taxpayers be damned.
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.
