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.
At no point in the history of this country has more than about 25% of the working population participated in a labor union. The middle class was around before labor unions and it will still be around once labor unions finally disappear into obscurity like they should.
What middle class was that. The middle class is diminishing and turning into the poor. And unions will always be around.
I was just stating a fact. Instead of admitting that workers will not move to union areas you come up with nonsense. Good for you.
I was just pointing out that what you support is turning the U.S into a third world country (and that desperate workers, instead of getting together, fracture and give power to the capitalists - by the by, I'm using capitalist as a noun here, hope that doesn't make your brain explode).
Nothing I'm saying is particularly complicated, but if you wish to call it nonsense because you don't understand it that's fine, I don't particularly care.
I was just pointing out that what you support is turning the U.S into a third world country (and that desperate workers, instead of getting together, fracture and give power to the capitalists - by the by, I'm using capitalist as a noun here, hope that doesn't make your brain explode).
Nothing I'm saying is particularly complicated, but if you wish to call it nonsense because you don't understand it that's fine, I don't particularly care.
Yes, I want to turn the US into a third world country. lols.
I said if you look at world migration patterns people always move from heavily unionized areas to non-union areas. The only exception I can think of was Detroit in the 1940s and 1950s.
I'm stating undeniable demographic facts. Somehow you think that means I want the U.S. to turn into a 3rd world country. lols. You can't deny the facts, so you spew more nonsense to deflect. lols.
By the way, if unions did what they say then workers would migrate to union areas, not leave them. This should tell anyone with any sense how much unions help workers.
Yes, I want to turn the US into a third world country. lols.
I said if you look at world migration patterns people always move from heavily unionized areas to non-union areas. The only exception I can think of was Detroit in the 1940s and 1950s.
I'm stating undeniable demographic facts. Somehow you think that means I want the U.S. to turn into a 3rd world country. lols. You can't deny the facts, so you spew more nonsense to deflect. lols.
By the way, if unions did what they say then workers would migrate to union areas, not leave them. This should tell anyone with any sense how much unions help workers.
Ok, so why would a union hater want to work at a union shop in the first place? What`s wrong with working at 7-11 where they don`t confiscate union dues from a workers paycheck?
Ok, so why would a union hater want to work at a union shop in the first place? What`s wrong with working at 7-11 where they don`t confiscate union dues from a workers paycheck?
What are you talking about?
I am not a spokesman for the union "haters".
I think the issue is why do unions interfere in the non-union laborers right to work? If unions care about all workers like they claim, they should force someone to join a union on condition of employment. After all, the non-union guy only wants to work.
They also wouldn't have a problem with strike-busters as all they are doing is trying to do a job. This proves unions could care less about workers rights. If they believed in workers rights they wouldn't try and deny the right to work to non-union folks.
I think the issue is why do unions interfere in the non-union laborers right to work? If unions care about all workers like they claim, they should force someone to join a union on condition of employment. After all, the non-union guy only wants to work.
They also wouldn't have a problem with strike-busters as all they are doing is trying to do a job. This proves unions could care less about workers rights. If they believed in workers rights they wouldn't try and deny the right to work to non-union folks.
They shouldn`t have a problem with someone trying to take their jobs?
They shouldn`t have a problem with someone trying to take their jobs?
Who is taking "their" job?
If I want to work and an employer wants to hire me I am not taking anyone's job. I am working. It's not my fault if I came to agreement with the employer and the union member didn't. Maybe they should negotiate something beneficial then they can "take" my job.
And the union member does not own his job in the first place. The fact that companies can go out of business or relocate without taking the employee proves this.
If unions cared about working people like they claimed they would not interfere with non-union workers. You can rationalize anyway you want, but unions do not care about workers. They care about dues paying members only.
If I want to work and an employer wants to hire me I am not taking anyone's job. I am working. It's not my fault if I came to agreement with the employer and the union member didn't. Maybe they should negotiate something beneficial then they can "take" my job.
And the union member does not own his job in the first place. The fact that companies can go out of business or relocate without taking the employee proves this.
If unions cared about working people like they claimed they would not interfere with non-union workers. You can rationalize anyway you want, but unions do not care about workers. They care about dues paying members only.
Would you expect the same wages and benefits that the union negotiated for its members?
Would you expect the same wages and benefits that the union negotiated for its members?
I would negotiate whatever wage I thought was reasonable. If I don't think it is a good deal I wouldn't take the job. That's what I've always done before.
If it is the same pay as the union members then so be it.
It's none of the unions business what I make. I didn't ask them to do anything for me. And since I've never been a union member they haven't done anything for me. They are not important to my life and they don't have the right to deny me employment or be concerned with what I make.
I don't go around telling people they shouldn't join a union nor do I stick my nose in their pay negotiations. They should extend me the same courtesy.
It's ****ing annoying when union members tell me all this stuff they did for me when they never did a damn thing for me, nor did I ask them to. They work for their members, not me.
Can't the argument be made that if you don't want to join a union, you are free to go get work at a non-union employer?
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.
