PDA

View Full Version : Another Instance of Union Impropriety



MoFinz
10-11-2012, 04:52 PM
http://youtu.be/KQjh3mv0w14


And remind me again how unions are any different from special interest groups?

Another example of the whole damn system being broken

:tubes:

TheWalrus
10-11-2012, 05:14 PM
Perhaps I'm just slow but is there something illegal about this?

MoFinz
10-11-2012, 05:41 PM
Fining people for not attending a political rally?

Don't know about you, but i don't see that as being very democratic. I can just imagine the railing if Chik-Fil_A fined their employees for not attending a GOP rally. Thats not democracy is it?

DisturbedShifty
10-11-2012, 05:45 PM
My new job is part of a Union. It is the first time I have, or will once my probation period is up, a Union. And I got to tell you, the whole thing rubs me the wrong way. I haven't been able to put a finger on it, but I know I don't like it. And the people that have been there for years are brainwashed it seems. Because if you talk about a job that doesn't have a Union they instantly turn their noses up at it. It's weird.

Forgive my spelling. This was sent from my phone.

TheWalrus
10-11-2012, 06:04 PM
Fining people for not attending a political rally?

Don't know about you, but i don't see that as being very democratic. I can just imagine the railing if Chik-Fil_A fined their employees for not attending a GOP rally. Thats not democracy is it?

I'm not sure I see it as particularly democratic either but if you willingly join a group it seems to me you might be expected to perform certain duties even if you don't particularly enjoy them or be fined by that group. If you buy a house in certain neighborhoods, for example, you're expected to only paint your house certain colors and to maintain your lawn a certain way.

The agreement to join the union or the neighborhood association means you implicitly acknowledge your duty to act in a certain way, even if it would not be your preference under different circumstances to act that way.

Perhaps if there's a lawyer on the boards he or she can comment on it. But I can't see where there's an illegality at play, even if I agree with yours and DisturbedShifty's characterization of this sort of thing as distasteful.

MoFinz
10-11-2012, 06:09 PM
Joining a union is supposed to be about protecting the jobs and wages of the union members. Actually taking money from them for not promoting the union agenda is profoundly wrong on so many levels. Using your logic, the union member totally abandons his right to any amount of self determination and should be fired if he even votes differently than his union bosses think he should.

Seriously flawed logic there my friend

phinfan3411
10-11-2012, 06:26 PM
My thoughts on unions are well documented here, i believe they were needed...at one time.

I also believe many have no idea how many of them work, they are probably lucky enough to live in a right to work state.

I will be honest, my wife is now a union member, as she just transferred to a hospital job from her nursing home job, but stayed with the same outfit. Why they were not both union, i have no idea, but it certainly didn't change my opinion.

Almost all of our local unions wind up in some type of legal trouble, so much so even our local newspaper noted how much money they have cost the taxpayer.

I'm with you Mo.

TheWalrus
10-11-2012, 06:37 PM
Joining a union is supposed to be about protecting the jobs and wages of the union members. Actually taking money from them for not promoting the union agenda is profoundly wrong on so many levels. Using your logic, the union member totally abandons his right to any amount of self determination and should be fired if he even votes differently than his union bosses think he should.

Seriously flawed logic there my friend

What's flawed about it? When you join a union, you agree to promote the union. If you have a problem with that, you're free to resign, though everyone's going to think you're an idiot because it's pretty clear what your duties are when you join.

Your freedom to vote for whoever you want and legal right not to disclose that vote is specifically protected by law. But nice try, friendo.

Try something more concrete than "wrong on so many levels" next time.

Spesh
10-11-2012, 06:48 PM
What's flawed about it? When you join a union, you agree to promote the union. If you have a problem with that, you're free to resign, though everyone's going to think you're an idiot because it's pretty clear what your duties are when you join.

Your freedom to vote for whoever you want and legal right not to disclose that vote is specifically protected by law. But nice try, friendo.

Try something more concrete than "wrong on so many levels" next time.

I agree. We are posting on a message board about a football team. Member of that football team give up some of their rights when they sign their contracts. They are compensated by getting stupid amounts of cash. Hell, i give up some rights to post on this message board. Same with this case.

Its very difficult to get the context of a story from a 22 second youtube video. But on general principle, i dont particularly appreciate what they pulled. That said, i understand there is certain things they have to do to stay in the union.

MoFinz
10-11-2012, 09:37 PM
What's flawed about it? When you join a union, you agree to promote the union. If you have a problem with that, you're free to resign, though everyone's going to think you're an idiot because it's pretty clear what your duties are when you join.

Your freedom to vote for whoever you want and legal right not to disclose that vote is specifically protected by law. But nice try, friendo.

Try something more concrete than "wrong on so many levels" next time.


Free to resign a union? In what world? Have you had any experience with unions? I grew up in ow a union family, i know the good and the bad of unions. Taking money from you to protect your working rights is one thing, but taking money out of your families mouths if you dont promote a political candidate you dont believe in or even object to is theft and coercion.

Try something more concrete than saying people should be slaves to their union bosses. I doubt you would find the same rules applied to you at your job whatever that may be, to be as tolerable as you pretend to be here

MoFinz
10-11-2012, 09:46 PM
I agree. We are posting on a message board about a football team. Member of that football team give up some of their rights when they sign their contracts. They are compensated by getting stupid amounts of cash. Hell, i give up some rights to post on this message board. Same with this case.

Its very difficult to get the context of a story from a 22 second youtube video. But on general principle, i dont particularly appreciate what they pulled. That said, i understand there is certain things they have to do to stay in the union.


Giving up the right to speak out or participate in certain activities is worlds different than being made to support politicians publicly that you do not support personally Monetary sanctions for failing to support an agenda that has no direct effect on your work conditions is theft.

Spesh
10-11-2012, 10:34 PM
Giving up the right to speak out or participate in certain activities is worlds different than being made to support politicians publicly that you do not support personally Monetary sanctions for failing to support an agenda that has no direct effect on your work conditions is theft.

Couldnt see the entire title of the video. Went ahead and clicked on the youtube button to see alittle more of the context. My mistake.

Yup, sleezy as hell. I objected when companies "insisted" their employees go to Romney rallies, i object to this union penalizing members who refused to support Warren. No one in a position of authority should attempt to influence the political, philosophical, religious leanings of those under their supervision.

TheWalrus
10-11-2012, 11:36 PM
Free to resign a union? In what world? Have you had any experience with unions? I grew up in ow a union family, i know the good and the bad of unions. Taking money from you to protect your working rights is one thing, but taking money out of your families mouths if you dont promote a political candidate you dont believe in or even object to is theft and coercion.

Try something more concrete than saying people should be slaves to their union bosses. I doubt you would find the same rules applied to you at your job whatever that may be, to be as tolerable as you pretend to be here

You are free to resign the union. You just won't be able to find work in whatever area that union works in.

Once again, I don't like this sort of thing but I don't think it's coercion if you knew going in what the parameters are. I know I'm repeating myself, but am I being coerced into only painting my house certain colors approved by the association if I knew before I bought the house that such rules existed? In a business situation of the kind Spesh is referencing they likely wouldn't be telling you in the interview process about the necessity to campaign for certain candidates or issues. The "condition" therefore would be after the fact, which to me changes the situation completely.

Your rhetoric about this being tantamount to slavery is ridiculous. Let's keep the discussion on planet Earth, if we can.

WVDolphan
10-12-2012, 12:15 AM
I cant believe I completely agree with the Walrus in this thread. Am I becoming a socialist? Wtf.

Spesh
10-12-2012, 12:40 AM
I cant believe I completely agree with the Walrus in this thread. Am I becoming a socialist? Wtf.

Yes.

phinfan3411
10-12-2012, 06:14 AM
So, if you want to work, you have to do whatever the mighty union tells you to do...

What a GREAT country.

In this area that absolutely includes rigging votes, elections, bribing officials to put helpful verbage in legislation killing independent competition, putting sand in independent's machinery gas tanks, threats etc.

By the way, none of the above is made up, it all comes from our local newspaper as about once a year a local union is on trial for usually about the same thing.

They have made it so all of our county construction is only really open to union construction companies, it might be state also but i'm not sure. This lead the News to write about how much these unions have cost the taxpayers over the years...when they wrote it i could not believe my eyes, must have been a moderate reporter.

MoFinz
10-12-2012, 07:40 AM
You are free to resign the union. You just won't be able to find work in whatever area that union works in.

Once again, I don't like this sort of thing but I don't think it's coercion if you knew going in what the parameters are. I know I'm repeating myself, but am I being coerced into only painting my house certain colors approved by the association if I knew before I bought the house that such rules existed? In a business situation of the kind Spesh is referencing they likely wouldn't be telling you in the interview process about the necessity to campaign for certain candidates or issues. The "condition" therefore would be after the fact, which to me changes the situation completely.

Your rhetoric about this being tantamount to slavery is ridiculous. Let's keep the discussion on planet Earth, if we can.

Of course you're right, what was I thinking? When you join a union, being forced to join a political process you neither endorse nor has any direct effect on your job or the ability to do it, is perfectly inline with your constitutional freedoms and in no way is akin to slavery. It's more like indentured servitude isn't it. It boggles the mind to actually think some people actually find this behavior acceptable. This isn't about some home owners association where the covenant covers everyone, this is about a union covering one political party over another and your livelihood to force you to enforce their political agenda over yours. I'll ask the question, what does filling up a political rally have to do with carpentry or brick laying.
Also, did you notice the guy say he wasn't being paid but he would be fined if he didnt participate? In a union, you don't do anything without being paid. Just doesn't happen. Unless your shop boss tells you to for the good of the unions political coffers huh?
If thats your earth, i gotta ask. How is Bizzaro Superman these days

TheWalrus
10-12-2012, 10:52 AM
Of course you're right, what was I thinking? When you join a union, being forced to join a political process you neither endorse nor has any direct effect on your job or the ability to do it, is perfectly inline with your constitutional freedoms and in no way is akin to slavery. It's more like indentured servitude isn't it. It boggles the mind to actually think some people actually find this behavior acceptable. This isn't about some home owners association where the covenant covers everyone, this is about a union covering one political party over another and your livelihood to force you to enforce their political agenda over yours. I'll ask the question, what does filling up a political rally have to do with carpentry or brick laying.

Though it's hardly the point, it's pretty easy to see how it can. Different political parties are bound to have different ideas about urban development generally and certain projects specifically. The livelihood of a carpenter or bricklayer is best enhanced by the party or politician that believes in infrastructure improvements.

The key issue is this one, which you are still dodging. True or false, are you aware before you join a union that you are going to be required to support political causes that support the union?


If thats your earth, i gotta ask. How is Bizzaro Superman these days

You are truly a very silly person. Slavery, indentured servitude (which you clearly don't know anything about). I mean, c'mon. Try thinking for two seconds before you post something so reactionary and ridiculous.

MoFinz
10-12-2012, 11:52 AM
Though it's hardly the point, it's pretty easy to see how it can. Different political parties are bound to have different ideas about urban development generally and certain projects specifically. The livelihood of a carpenter or bricklayer is best enhanced by the party or politician that believes in infrastructure improvements.

The key issue is this one, which you are still dodging. True or false, are you aware before you join a union that you are going to be required to support political causes that support the union?



You are truly a very silly person. Slavery, indentured servitude (which you clearly don't know anything about). I mean, c'mon. Try thinking for two seconds before you post something so reactionary and ridiculous.


LOL, you call me silly and ridicule my posts, then you dismiss me casually. C'mon man, you gotta bring better than that. You want me to produce evidence for your argument? Tell ya what, YOU go find me the union literature that states you have to go on your own time to support political figures that do not pertain to your job. You claim that a politician affects the job because of the policies they may bring. I defy you to show me a sitting politician that has done more to cost union jobs than the union officers that price themselves out of competitive bid jobs. I'll wait. I know it's a long trip back to Bizarro World.

As far as being a silly person......didn't you admit you have no knowledge of unions? And here you are ridiculing someone that has a lifetime of first hand experience of unions in action. Must be nice to have been born omniscient. (That's probably a big word for you, which you clearly don't know anything about)

Valandui
10-12-2012, 12:03 PM
I'm not sure I see it as particularly democratic either but if you willingly join a group it seems to me you might be expected to perform certain duties even if you don't particularly enjoy them or be fined by that group. If you buy a house in certain neighborhoods, for example, you're expected to only paint your house certain colors and to maintain your lawn a certain way.

The agreement to join the union or the neighborhood association means you implicitly acknowledge your duty to act in a certain way, even if it would not be your preference under different circumstances to act that way.

Perhaps if there's a lawyer on the boards he or she can comment on it. But I can't see where there's an illegality at play, even if I agree with yours and DisturbedShifty's characterization of this sort of thing as distasteful.

A lot of states force you to join a union if you want a job.

phinfan3411
10-12-2012, 12:21 PM
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/nasty-union-violence-legal/story?id=14572790

Just a link to back up some of the things I have been spouting.

Very interesting reading, especially if you liked "The Sopranos". If it wasn't so truly sad, it would be funny, this is the crap you have to put up with when you live in a corrupt union laden state such as this.

I also have to comment on the home owners association comparison, I feel this is a terrible comparison, it assumes that you have a similiar ability to choose both house and job. We bought a house about 6 years ago, and easily looked at 12-15 of them, in different neighborhoods, we could have continued for months, there were literally thousands that matched our criteria.

It's been a while since i looked for a job (thankfully), but i'm pretty sure MOST people are not fortunate enough to pick between thousands of offers, in this day and age many would be happy with ONE offer...so i feel that is a terrible comparison.

By the way, there are many more examples of this, just from my little area of the country, i just have to remember all the numbers of the local unions to give you the data. It is NOT isolated incident, i had to ask my friend what the number was of this union to find it though...have a bad memory.

phinfan3411
10-12-2012, 12:26 PM
LOL, you call me silly and ridicule my posts, then you dismiss me casually. C'mon man, you gotta bring better than that. You want me to produce evidence for your argument? Tell ya what, YOU go find me the union literature that states you have to go on your own time to support political figures that do not pertain to your job. You claim that a politician affects the job because of the policies they may bring. I defy you to show me a sitting politician that has done more to cost union jobs than the union officers that price themselves out of competitive bid jobs. I'll wait. I know it's a long trip back to Bizarro World.

As far as being a silly person......didn't you admit you have no knowledge of unions? And here you are ridiculing someone that has a lifetime of first hand experience of unions in action. Must be nice to have been born omniscient. (That's probably a big word for you, which you clearly don't know anything about)


Mo, you have been missed...that is all.

MoFinz
10-12-2012, 01:16 PM
Mo, you have been missed...that is all.


Thanks, I've missed being around. Place hardly seems the same :brewskis:

TheWalrus
10-12-2012, 02:32 PM
LOL, you call me silly and ridicule my posts, then you dismiss me casually.

I dunno. I think I'm dismissing you pretty actively, actually.


You want me to produce evidence for your argument? Tell ya what, YOU go find me the union literature that states you have to go on your own time to support political figures that do not pertain to your job.

I wasn't asking you for evidence to support my argument. I was asking for evidence -- any evidence -- regarding my specific question. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. But despite your "lifetime" of first hand experience you don't seem to be able to rebut my supposition, which probably means that you can't.

Edit: And now I know why. This is from the SEIU bylaws:


SEIU Bill of Rights and Responsibilities in the Union

The right to have opinions heard and respected, to be informed of union activity, to be educated in union values and union skills.

The right to choose the leaders of the union in a fair and democratic manner.

The right to a full accounting of union dues and the proper stewardship over union resources.

The right to participate in the union’s bargaining efforts and to approve union contracts.

The right to have members’ concerns resolved in a fair and expeditious manner.

The responsibility to help build a strong and more effective labor movement, to support the organizing of unorganized workers, to help build a political voice for working people, and to stand up for one’s co-workers and all workers.

The responsibility to contribute to the support of the union.

The responsibility to treat all workers and members fairly.

The responsibility to offer constructive criticism of the union.

Here's the link (page 43): https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:0uX-7Dj5s78J:www.seiu.org/images/pdfs/Con.BylawsFinal3.4.9.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShBQmLxykJ4KaXx4xvJ0wmEqCF95bAETe72luZgnKS8r9CQvTkNSJDVqBGXxmxsq0pWIFH9g4Dp7MiV5pKO4nHcrsr_H3TFarXrRiOI5Pg1gCkuvra0UO1kf0aJk7I_6VxqpPQ-&sig=AHIEtbQ_kAYxrm-SufFv4kUeJJRWHpTd4A

Now if you don't mind, a fine lunch of nectar and ambrosia awaits me on Mt. Olympus.

MoFinz
10-12-2012, 03:22 PM
I dunno. I think I'm dismissing you pretty actively, actually.



I wasn't asking you for evidence to support my argument. I was asking for evidence -- any evidence -- regarding my specific question. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. But despite your "lifetime" of first hand experience you don't seem to be able to rebut my supposition, which probably means that you can't.

Edit: And now I know why. This is from the SEIU bylaws:



Here's the link (page 43): https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:0uX-7Dj5s78J:www.seiu.org/images/pdfs/Con.BylawsFinal3.4.9.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShBQmLxykJ4KaXx4xvJ0wmEqCF95bAETe72luZgnKS8r9CQvTkNSJDVqBGXxmxsq0pWIFH9g4Dp7MiV5pKO4nHcrsr_H3TFarXrRiOI5Pg1gCkuvra0UO1kf0aJk7I_6VxqpPQ-&sig=AHIEtbQ_kAYxrm-SufFv4kUeJJRWHpTd4A

Now if you don't mind, a fine lunch of nectar and ambrosia awaits me on Mt. Olympus.

Understand context much? Building a political voice is a part of that whole line, but nowhere in that line does it impose a penalty for failure to participate in a union supported event. The union bosses are the political voice for the workers. You dont see workers at an arbiters table during a negotiation. Political issues, like labor issues, are handled above the worker grade.
The second line you highlight? Refers to the monetary and devotional support, it's not a demand for political fealty.
Now...since you've become the expert on unions, look up in there and tell me what the term "salting" means. After you've wiped the nectar and ambrosia from you chin.
Next time, do some independent thinking and don't rely on a weak word in one line that doesn't exactly buttress your argument.

p.s. Hope lunch was good.....ambrosia usually makes me gassy:oops:

TheWalrus
10-12-2012, 04:21 PM
Understand context much? Building a political voice is a part of that whole line, but nowhere in that line does it impose a penalty for failure to participate in a union supported event.

So on your planet there's no relationship between marching and holding up signs and building a political voice? Neato. What do you call it?


14.The Executive Board of each Local Union shall appoint such committees as it deems necessary to carry out the organizing, political action, social and economic justice and retiree programs and policies of this International Union.

That must not mean anything either. And there's no way that failing to discharge one's duty could lead to any sort of a punishment, right?


PREAMBLE. In order to ensure members’ protection from the filing of frivolous charges, the following
procedures shall apply:

Section 1. Local Unions, their officers or members, and officers of any affiliated body, and officers of the International Union, as the case may be, may be charged with:

(1) Violation of any specific provision of this Constitution or of the Constitution and Bylaws of the Local Union...

...Section 5. The trial body, after requisite due process has been afforded, may impose such penalty as it deems appropriate and as the case requires.

D'oh!

MoFinz
10-12-2012, 06:53 PM
So on your planet there's no relationship between marching and holding up signs and building a political voice? Neato. What do you call it?



That must not mean anything either. And there's no way that failing to discharge one's duty could lead to any sort of a punishment, right?



D'oh!

D'oh is right. Or did you hear the guy in the video make reference to his due process? No? I wonder, could that maybe be because there would be no due process?

You just don't want to see do you?

TheWalrus
10-12-2012, 07:26 PM
D'oh is right. Or did you hear the guy in the video make reference to his due process? No? I wonder, could that maybe be because there would be no due process?

You just don't want to see do you?

Yeah, amazing that in a 23 second video they didn't get to that. LOL.

MoFinz
10-12-2012, 08:15 PM
Yeah, amazing that in a 23 second video they didn't get to that. LOL.


LOL yeah......maybe because there is no due process.....just the fine. How ya doing with that salting definition btw? Bet ya find that interesting

LouPhinFan
10-12-2012, 08:55 PM
Did I see that someone used the term "willingly join a union" in this thread? LOL at that. Most jobs that I know of that are union MAKE you join the union.

I've been apart of one union in my life; the cashiers/baggers union when I worked at a grocery store during college. I asked them if I had to join the union and they said "no, but we're still going to take our dues". Try working in a Ford plant and not join the union. Laughable.

Unions wield more power in this country than they should.

MoFinz
10-12-2012, 10:25 PM
Did I see that someone used the term "willingly join a union" in this thread? LOL at that. Most jobs that I know of that are union MAKE you join the union.

I've been apart of one union in my life; the cashiers/baggers union when I worked at a grocery store during college. I asked them if I had to join the union and they said "no, but we're still going to take our dues". Try working in a Ford plant and not join the union. Laughable.

Unions wield more power in this country than they should.

Shhhhhhh....Walrus hasn't gotten to that part of the SEIU handbook. Thank God i live in a right to work state. I remember walking a picket line with my dad as a kid......great fun let me tell you

TheWalrus
10-13-2012, 12:04 AM
LOL yeah......maybe because there is no due process.....just the fine. How ya doing with that salting definition btw? Bet ya find that interesting

Maybe if I had some respect for you I would look it up but honestly I don't.


Did I see that someone used the term "willingly join a union" in this thread? LOL at that. Most jobs that I know of that are union MAKE you join the union.

That would be me. Yes, the jobs that are union make you join the union. Shocking. And if the job is union and you're not union they take the money from you anyway because they're bargaining on your behalf. Which means you're getting more in wages than you would have otherwise.

The point is that there are plenty of careers and places to live in this country that aren't union. So yeah, if you want to be in the service industry and want to live in Las Vegas... you will have to join a union. But there's no law that says you have to do EITHER ONE. It's up to you where you live and what you do. Take some personal responsibility for your career choices and where you choose to live, is all I'm saying. The information is out there. The bylaws are clear. Don't blame someone else because you didn't know you couldn't join the NYPD without being in a union.

MoFinz
10-13-2012, 12:28 AM
Maybe if I had some respect for you I would look it up but honestly I don't.



That would be me. Yes, the jobs that are union make you join the union. Shocking. And if the job is union and you're not union they take the money from you anyway because they're bargaining on your behalf. Which means you're getting more in wages than you would have otherwise.

The point is that there are plenty of careers and places to live in this country that aren't union. So yeah, if you want to be in the service industry and want to live in Las Vegas... you will have to join a union. But there's no law that says you have to do EITHER ONE. It's up to you where you live and what you do. Take some personal responsibility for your career choices and where you choose to live, is all I'm saying. The information is out there. The bylaws are clear. Don't blame someone else because you didn't know you couldn't join the NYPD without being in a union.

You don't respect me? I'm crushed. And all i wanted to do was earn your respect. Woe unto me.......

And the "you can move somewhere you dont have to join a union to work" argument? Really? You just accept the intolerable and move on? I wonder where you would have stood during Brown v. BOE or the civil rights marches. "Oh hey, it's their choice to live in a south that represses them. They know what it is down there, they should move if they don't like it"

I had high hopes for you going into this discourse. It saddens me to say, you are lacking...........

LouPhinFan
10-13-2012, 09:19 AM
Maybe if I had some respect for you I would look it up but honestly I don't.



That would be me. Yes, the jobs that are union make you join the union. Shocking. And if the job is union and you're not union they take the money from you anyway because they're bargaining on your behalf. Which means you're getting more in wages than you would have otherwise.

The point is that there are plenty of careers and places to live in this country that aren't union. So yeah, if you want to be in the service industry and want to live in Las Vegas... you will have to join a union. But there's no law that says you have to do EITHER ONE. It's up to you where you live and what you do. Take some personal responsibility for your career choices and where you choose to live, is all I'm saying. The information is out there. The bylaws are clear. Don't blame someone else because you didn't know you couldn't join the NYPD without being in a union.

Fair enough. But unions still hold more power in today's society than they were ever meant to have.

phinfan3411
10-13-2012, 12:03 PM
Fair enough. But unions still hold more power in today's society than they were ever meant to have.

You are 100% correct, if you go on open secrets and look at the top contributors to federal campaigns over the last 20 years, last time i looked at it 11 of the top 20 contributors were unions.

So i would guess you could make the assumptions at unions being the single biggest and most powerful special interest, but that is just my opinion.

What i hate about it is they try to classify anyone against them as anti-worker. I am a manager at a non union business, but rest assured i am "pro worker".

I feel workers should not have their rights trampled on, but let's be real here, unions are into so much stuff they shouldn't be and we even have to put up with public employee unions here.

My feelings on public unions? The same as FDR's, who is considered the father of the modern day labor movement...people don't like to discuss his feelings on this, because it doesn't fit their agenda.

MoFinz
10-14-2012, 06:47 AM
http://http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/13/Nursing-Home-Companies-File-RICO-Lawsuit-Against-SEIU (www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/13/Nursing-Home-Companies-File-RICO-Lawsuit-Against-SEIU)

CedarPhin
10-14-2012, 03:39 PM
lol @ using Breitbart as some sort of accurate news source. That's like a Dem using Mother Jones to back up their point.

MoFinz
10-14-2012, 05:49 PM
lol @ using Breitbart as some sort of accurate news source. That's like a Dem using Mother Jones to back up their point.ng

LOL at scoffing at the idea that knowledge is invalidated because you don't approve of the source. Of course, i also posted a link from CNN earlier today so how to explain that? hmmmmmmmmm

Just read it and absorb it or dont, but dont dismiss it because you dont like where it came from.

:crazy:

TheWalrus
10-14-2012, 10:03 PM
Fair enough. But unions still hold more power in today's society than they were ever meant to have.

Unions have less power today than at any time in the last 60 years.

MoFinz
10-14-2012, 10:30 PM
Unions have less power today than at any time in the last 60 years.


:lol2:

LouPhinFan
10-14-2012, 11:17 PM
Unions have less power today than at any time in the last 60 years.

It's still too much.

TheWalrus
10-15-2012, 02:09 PM
It's still too much.

If companies treated their workers as potential customers rather than merely disposable labor there would be no need for unions, and indeed one of the reasons unions are less prevalent now is that they have helped push for working standards that everyone has benefited from. Companies realized the concessions led generally to a better and more dedicated workforce and realized they could avoid costly strikes and other strife by simply creating a working environment good enough so that a union wouldn't form.

So bash them all you want, but everyone in this country has benefited from unions whether they want to admit it or not.

The move in the last two decades to a more globalized workforce (post WWII, the US was the only industrialized country whose infrastructure was still intact, which gave organized labor a lot of power) has, not coincidentally, led to a reduction in the power of unions, and therefore a reduction in working standards in the US as well. Wal-Mart has become the poster child for a new era in exploitative practices but they're hardly the worst offender. I don't know if anyone's read about the conditions at these big shipping warehouses (Amazon, et all) but it's on par with just about anything you'll read coming out of China these days.

This is a great undercover-style article from a while back. It's worth reading in it's entirety but here's a quote.


Then as quickly as we've come, we all run back. At the end of the 15 minutes, we're supposed to be back at whichever far-flung corner of the warehouse we came from, scanners in hand, working. We run to grab the wheeled carts we put the totes on. We run past each other and if we do say something, we say it as we keep moving. "How's the job market?" a supervisor says, laughing, as several of us newbies run by. "Just kidding!" Ha ha! "I know why you guys are here. That's why I'm here, too!" At another near collision between employees, one wants to know how complaining about not being able to get time off went and the other spits that he was told he was lucky to have a job. This is no way to have a conversation, but at least conversations are not forbidden, as they were in the Ohio warehouse I reported on—where I saw a guy get fired for talking, specifically for asking another employee, "Where are you from?" So I'm allowed the extravagance of smiling at a guy who is always so unhappy and saying, "How's it goin'?" And he can respond, "Terrible," as I'm running to the big industrial cage-lift that takes our carts up to the second or third floors, which involves walking under a big metal bar gating the front of it, and which I should really take my time around. Within the last month, three different people have needed stitches in the head after being clocked by these big metal bars, so it's dangerous. Especially the lift in the Dallas sector, whose bar has been installed wrong, so it is extra prone to falling, they tell us. Be careful. Seriously, though. We really need to meet our goals here.


Amalgamated has estimated that we pickers speed-walk an average of 12 miles a day on cold concrete, and the twinge in my legs blurs into the heavy soreness in my feet that complements the pinch in my hips when I crouch to the floor—the pickers' shelving runs from the floor to seven feet high or so—to retrieve an iPad protective case. iPad anti-glare protector. iPad one-hand grip-holder device. Thing that looks like a landline phone handset that plugs into your iPad so you can pretend that rather than talking via iPad you are talking on a phone. And dildos. Really, a staggering number of dildos. At breaks, some of my coworkers complain that they have to handle so many dildos. But it's one of the few joys of my day. I've started cringing every time my scanner shows a code that means the item I need to pick is on the ground, which, in the course of a 10.5-hour shift—much less the mandatory 12-hour shifts everyone is slated to start working next week—is literally hundreds of times a day. "How has OSHA signed off on this?" I've taken to muttering to myself. "Has OSHA signed off on this?" ("The thing about ergonomics," OSHA says when I call them later to ask, "is that OSHA doesn't have a standard. Best practices. But no laws.") So it's a welcome distraction, really, to imagine all these sex toys being taken out from under a tree and unwrapped. Merry Christmas. I got you this giant black **** you wanted.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac-mcclelland-free-online-shipping-warehouses-labor?page=1

Unfettered capitalism is not a goal unto itself. The goal is an efficient society where the system and the rules benefit the people. Where laizze faire accomplishes that goal, great. Where it doesn't, it should be regulated.