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.
Yup, I'm looking forward to this too. Don't believe all the left wing propaganda about unions. Unions had their time and place about 100 years ago. BTW, this will stop forcing people to pay union dues that are used to for political endorsements and contributions that people do not agree with. Sounds quite logical to me. No wonder union leadership hates this. They'll no longer be able to suck out money of working people who don't agree with them to bribe politicians. It's about time and long overdue. I hardly would call that the death of our country.
I agree that there was a time and a place for unions and that they've outlived their usefulness. All they want to do now is figure out ways to get paid for doing nothing and protect bums with seniority.
There are more public sector unions(government must be some bad employers) than there are private sector unions.
Not really, it's just easier to start a union in a public organization. Private companies have become very good at fighting efforts to unionize. When Walmart hears rumblings about unionization they hire undercover security to go to employee break rooms and identify those employees talking about unions, they are summarily discharged and the employees know why they were fired, those who need their jobs abandon the idea of forming a union. And isn't if funny that if unions are as useless as people in this thread claim that Walmart would spend time and money on keeping them out? What a Leaked Training Video Reveals About Walmart's Anti-Union Efforts - The Atlantic
But why, exactly, should people who work for government agencies have fewer rights than someone who works for Wal-Mart?
Because they are... lazy, incompetent, bloodsucking, on the dole in that taxes pay their salaries... and generally have jobs that people who portray them as the above would love to have, but don't have the spine to do. So, they are reviled by those who are jealous. It goes back to Animal Farm - some animals are more equal than others, they they don't believe anyone who works for a government deserves... anything. Perhaps we should give all the civil service jobs to prisoners to do, pay them $.10 per hour, and see how well that goes.
Because they are... lazy, incompetent, bloodsucking, on the dole in that taxes pay their salaries... and generally have jobs that people who portray them as the above would love to have, but don't have the spine to do. So, they are reviled by those who are jealous. It goes back to Animal Farm - some animals are more equal than others, they they don't believe anyone who works for a government deserves... anything. Perhaps we should give all the civil service jobs to prisoners to do, pay them $.10 per hour, and see how well that goes.
I agree that there was a time and a place for unions and that they've outlived their usefulness. All they want to do now is figure out ways to get paid for doing nothing and protect bums with seniority.
That's profound! Now how about backing it up with some evidence? Unions are every bit as relevant as they ever were, it's just that some people have decided to be hypnotized by Fox news, Breitbart and Heritage and refuse to do any independent inquiry into the function of labor unions and WHO is behind trying to get rid of them:
Why are big private companies spending a lot of money and energy fighting public sector unions?
"They want more free trade, lower minimum wage, the right not to pay sick leave, and all those things which are not per se about union contracts. But the biggest single opponent they have is the labor movement, even in its shrunken and weaker state." Lafer blames businesses and key business figures for lobbying to push such laws "not because of what unions are doing now for their own members but to get them out of the way on issues that will affect everybody else." These campaigns stigmatize unions and encourage people who are unemployed to resent unions rather than big business leaders, he argued. "Their fear is populism," he said, referring to those who are "at the top of the economy, during downward mobility."
"They want the discontent to not be aimed at people running the economy."
That's profound! Now how about backing it up with some evidence? Unions are every bit as relevant as they ever were
I agree with ED' opinion. When unions were first formed, they were desperately needed. But as usual, "power corrupts ... (you know the rest)". When you take a look at the big city unions and their work rules, it is easy to see why construction costs are through the roof. Sluggo teachers keep their positions and have all the protection in the world [I still have heard nothing more about the illegal Detroit teachers strike].
Obviously you will disagree. Your point seems to be that you are pointing the finger at who wants to bust unions. I suggest you take a moment and think about the other reasons for breaking them up. For example, go by some construction site and see how many are working, how many are watching, and how many are 'supervising'. You've seen this as have I and that is exactly why I agree with ED.
Not really, it's just easier to start a union in a public organization. Private companies have become very good at fighting efforts to unionize. When Walmart hears rumblings about unionization they hire undercover security to go to employee break rooms and identify those employees talking about unions, they are summarily discharged and the employees know why they were fired, those who need their jobs abandon the idea of forming a union. And isn't if funny that if unions are as useless as people in this thread claim that Walmart would spend time and money on keeping them out? What a Leaked Training Video Reveals About Walmart's Anti-Union Efforts - The Atlantic
Not really??? and then you explain to me why I am correct, that there are way more public sector unions, than their private sector counterparts.
Unions were created because of bad work conditions and pay. Government never had those issues... It must be to put revenue in the pocket of a political campaign only.
I agree with ED' opinion. When unions were first formed, they were desperately needed. But as usual, "power corrupts ... (you know the rest)". When you take a look at the big city unions and their work rules, it is easy to see why construction costs are through the roof. Sluggo teachers keep their positions and have all the protection in the world [I still have heard nothing more about the illegal Detroit teachers strike].
Obviously you will disagree. Your point seems to be that you are pointing the finger at who wants to bust unions. I suggest you take a moment and think about the other reasons for breaking them up. For example, go by some construction site and see how many are working, how many are watching, and how many are 'supervising'. You've seen this as have I and that is exactly why I agree with ED.
El Nox
What does this have to do with unions? And you have no idea what's really going on....maybe breaks, maybe apprentices learning the job. Who knows. You go into offices and see the same thing so I don't understand your point
For example, go by some construction site and see how many are working, how many are watching, and how many are 'supervising'. You've seen this as have I and that is exactly why I agree with ED. El Nox
So what you are saying is that Unions have rules that people can stand around and do nothing without getting paid for it? You have to know that is just silly. When you see people standing around a construction site it is usually due to one of the following reasons:
1)Worker B has to wait for worker A to finish before he can proceed
2)Workers are waiting for a delivery of supplies or equipment that they need before they can resume their work.
3) They are waiting for an inspection or sign off before they and resume their work
Not really??? and then you explain to me why I am correct, that there are way more public sector unions, than their private sector counterparts.
Unions were created because of bad work conditions and pay. Government never had those issues... It must be to put revenue in the pocket of a political campaign only.
It has nothing to do with campaign contributions. Unions fight for the middle class when no one else seems to care. How much do you pay for health insurance. Unions fight for affordable healthcare for their employees which is huge. Do you want less or more government involvement.
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.
