American Unions -- Good or Bad for America?

[Madeline]

I am more'n willing to dialogue on the history of American unions, though organized labor history t'aint my speciality. However, I'd prefer it if we focused on the value (or loss of value) to the nation we receive from unions as they exist today.

In my mind,there are various sorts of unions and they have different effects.

Government worker unions. Teachers unions, postal worker unions, federal employee civil service/unions, police unions, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, etc.

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unskilled labor unions. I do not mean no one belonging to these unions has any skills; I mean that these unions admit unskilled workers. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, Transport Workers Union of America, United Mine Workers of America, AFL-CIO, etc.

http://www.aflcio.org/

Skilled Labor Unions. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, United Association of Plumbers and Pipefitters, International Union of Elevator Constructors, etc.

http://ibew.org/

If when posting, you mean that a good or bad effect follows from the activities of one type of union but not another, it'd be helpful if you clarified that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Were good, now bad.

 

[Mr Natural]

Anybody who draws a paycheck owes a huge debt of gratitude to the Labor Movement.

 

[Defiant1]

Whatever perceived good unions have produced in no way justifies the evil they committed during their inception.

 

[boedicca]

Public Employee Unions are bad for America. Career polticians have colluded with such unions to fleece the taxpayer. In exchange for excessive compensation and benefits, such unions donate to and support the campaigns of career pols. The financial solvency of federal, state, and local governments is severely threatened by the burgeoning underfunded pension liabilities for these employees to retire far earlier than their counterparts in the private sector.

Greece IS a prequel.

 

[Madeline]

To Quantum Windbag: You see no present day value from unions? What about the workers at Walmarts who are so badly exploited?

To Defiant: How can a man or woman be liable for the sins of their great-grandparents? What about the sins of the wealthy business owners, who murdered and committed mayhem in the early days to bust unions? Are their great-grandchildren vicariously liable as well?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

To Quantum Windbag: You see no present day value from unions? What about the workers at Walmarts who are so badly exploited?

Just because you, and the unions, think they are exploited does not mean that they are. They have consistently voted against unionizing, so they must think they are doing pretty good. Why do you think the unions want the card check law?

 

[Madeline]

To Quantum Windbag: You see no present day value from unions? What about the workers at Walmarts who are so badly exploited?

Just because you, and the unions, think they are exploited does not mean that they are. They have consistently voted against unionizing, so they must think they are doing pretty good. Why do you think the unions want the card check law?

Card check - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Very interesting stuff, Quantum Windbag. But do you deny Walmarts exploits its workers? Or that the company routinely engages in unfair labor practices? If Walmarts workers were unionized, wages would rise (one would expect) so that a living wage would be possible, at least for senior people.

Is this something we no longer desire for American workers?

Unions have brought American workers job security, benefits, safer working conditions, better wages.....like anyone else, they can go too far, but a middle class standard of living would not be possible for many American families without unions.

I'm not seeing the down side.

 

[Douger]

To Quantum Windbag: You see no present day value from unions? What about the workers at Walmarts who are so badly exploited?

Rather than unions there should be federal employment regulations in regard to salary/skill. Mandatory paid vacations, maximum overtime,hazardous duty pay/night shift, etc etc.
This should include anyone employed including the oil change guy, the nurse or the grass cutter.
Why should an electrician for Goodyear get $35 an hour and an electrician at Bobs AC and refrigeration get $15 ?

Several of my employees are in Costa Rica.They get a mandatory bonus by dec. 10 and it is the equivalent of one months salary,plus 12 days paid vacation, and several holidays including 3 days the week of Easter/aka/Semana Santa.I pay 26% of their salaries to the SS system. They pay 9%.
I'm required by law to keep a separate policy should they get hurt on the job that pays them 75% of their salary for as long as they are off. Up to six months.Govt owned insurance. $180/yr. per employee. Then regular disability through SS takes over.
SS covers them for any time off sick or injured off the job, after 3 days off. I have to pay 50% of their salary for the first 3 days. Their electric, internet, and telephone are free during those times.Socialism !
Pretty neat what a country can do when it's not interfering with everyone elses bidness and supporting IsNtReal.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

To Quantum Windbag: You see no present day value from unions? What about the workers at Walmarts who are so badly exploited?

Just because you, and the unions, think they are exploited does not mean that they are. They have consistently voted against unionizing, so they must think they are doing pretty good. Why do you think the unions want the card check law?

Card check - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Very interesting stuff, Quantum Windbag. But do you deny Walmarts exploits its workers? Or that the company routinely engages in unfair labor practices? If Walmarts workers were unionized, wages would rise (one would expect) so that a living wage would be possible, at least for senior people.

Is this something we no longer desire for American workers?

Unions have brought American workers job security, benefits, safer working conditions, better wages.....like anyone else, they can go too far, but a middle class standard of living would not be possible for many American families without unions.

I'm not seeing the down side.

If Walmart denied them union elections then you might have a point. The truth of the matter is that the unions have tried to unionize Walmart quite a few times, and have always failed. That tells me more than the claims that Walmart has unfair labor practices and exploits their workers.

The card check is un-American, because it will deny workers the right to a secret ballot, and allow union thugs to intimidate workers to force them to join a union they do not want to join. If unions are so good for workers, why is almost every pension fund in the country that is run by a union in trouble? Why has union membership steadily declined in the private sector?

You don't get to look back and claim a right to exist simply because you did something good 100 years ago.

 

[syrenn]

Scab labor is only labor that the union doesn't like. Or more importantly scab labor is NOT paying into the union coffers in terms of dues.

Getting a license to be a contractor does not mean you have to join a union to acquire the license. States do not require you to be a union member to take tests, pass and receive said license. That is why it is called a licensed contractor. Not a UNION contractor.

Garbage collection is UNION controlled deal. That's why they don't want you to burn your garbage. If you burn your garbage the UNION cant collect it.

There is NO law that says you MUST hire union workers.

Couldn't put it better myself!

This is only true in some states. As best I know, all "Right To Work" states are located in the Deep South, but I'll admit I don't know the law of California. If the Housing Code in issue required a licensed contractor be employed and one was not, I see no reason to excuse law-breaking by any property owner merely because he/she/it/they claims to be religious.

The fact that these property owners already evade all taxes just pours salt in the wound. WHEN are they gonna be done demanding MORE MORE MORE from their communities where they own land and buildings?

This is only true in some states. As best I know, all "Right To Work" states are located in the Deep South, but I'll admit I don't know the law of California. If the Housing Code in issue required a licensed contractor be employed and one was not, I see no reason to excuse law-breaking by any property owner merely because he/she/it/they claims to be religious.

The fact that these property owners already evade all taxes just pours salt in the wound. WHEN are they gonna be done demanding MORE MORE MORE from their communities where they own land and buildings?

A licensed contractor is just that, he holds a state issued license.To be legal all contractors MUST have a license.

That does NOT MEAN said licensed contractor is required to be a UNION CARD HOLDING MEMBER.

Where as union members are NOT required to have a state issued contractors license. They are however required to pay dues.

This is only true in some states. As best I know, all "Right To Work" states are located in the Deep South, but I'll admit I don't know the law of California. If the Housing Code in issue required a licensed contractor be employed and one was not, I see no reason to excuse law-breaking by any property owner merely because he/she/it/they claims to be religious.

The fact that these property owners already evade all taxes just pours salt in the wound. WHEN are they gonna be done demanding MORE MORE MORE from their communities where they own land and buildings?

Your missing the point Madeline. This has nothing to do with churches getting out of paying their fair share of anything. They are obviously paying a licensed contractors to do a job. Get it, they are paying scabs, no union people NOT paying UNION DUES

The problem is the union is pissed off that the church is NOT using union workers. Read the sigh, LABOR DISPUTE true union words.. My guess the guys doing the work aren't the one disputing labor with the church.

The UNION is.

In MOST states there is only one path to licensure for the trades: apprenticeship through the unions.

I am unclear why you object so strenuously to a living wage for your fellow Americans, syrenn, but it seems rather un-christian to me. Mebbe that church's property could have been built with slave labor. Or using stolen materials.

Is slave labor or theft okay by you so long as it enriches some religious outlet? Seems to me paying a decent wage for a day's work should be a religious principle -- as should behaving in a law-abiding manner.

If there are to be two standards of conduct -- one for religious outlets and one for everyone else -- then shouldn't the separate standard for religious outfits be HIGHER? Are you seriously suggesting they get a pass on illegal activity?

The only way to a license is to take the state test. That makes you a state licenced contractor.

Read your argument. "there is only one path to licensure for the trades: apprenticeship through the unions."


Oh Really?

So are you saying that if you want to be a contractor you are REQUIRED to be a union member? THAT smacks of blackmail to me!

Let me see, yes you can be a licensed contractor, BUT ONLY if you join the union? What if you don't want to join the union. Is joining the union a requirement to hold a state contractors license?

Get off your religious high horse on this one Maddie, its a looser. There is NO double standard. So long as you hire a licensed contractor to do the work, the work is legal.

syrenn, a general contractor is not a tradesman. He employs trades, but he need not have their skills. Trades are people like electricians, plumbers, etc. And yes, in many states the ONLY way to acquire an electricians' license is to join the union and apprentice to a Master Electrician.

Some things cannot be taught in a classroom, and some risks of error are too high for society to tolerate.

Yes, if the church hired licensed workers in conformity with the law, then the hiring was legal. If they did not, it wasn't. It certainly sounds as if the church did not or the unions would not be protesting scab labor at their sites. Are you gonna be all warm and fuzzy if the church's electrical system shorts out, causes a fire and kills the faithful?

I dunno how you come by this hatred for unions, syrenn, but where the trades are concerned it is misplaced. Without them, none of us so would much as dare ride on an elevator.

In MOST states there is only one path to licensure for the trades: apprenticeship through the unions.

I am unclear why you object so strenuously to a living wage for your fellow Americans, syrenn, but it seems rather un-christian to me. Mebbe that church's property could have been built with slave labor. Or using stolen materials.

Is slave labor or theft okay by you so long as it enriches some religious outlet? Seems to me paying a decent wage for a day's work should be a religious principle -- as should behaving in a law-abiding manner.

If there are to be two standards of conduct -- one for religious outlets and one for everyone else -- then shouldn't the separate standard for religious outfits be HIGHER? Are you seriously suggesting they get a pass on illegal activity?

Now for the rest. Remember maddie, you are mixing up two issues here.

Why do you think I am against a living wage? I am against UNIONS.

What does slave labor have anything to do with the church using NON UNION labor? Slave labor from old? My guess the contractors would not be working there if they were not PAID. That is not slave labor. Nor does the church OWN any of the people working, that would be slave labor.

Don't make me laugh. Stolen materials. Are you forgetting who your are defending? The unions. They would be the ones I would be looking at for 'stolen material"

syrenn, a general contractor is not a tradesman. He employs trades, but he need not have their skills. Trades are people like electricians, plumbers, etc. And yes, in many states the ONLY way to acquire an electricians' license is to join the union and apprentice to a Master Electrician.

Some things cannot be taught in a classroom, and some risks of error are too high for society to tolerate.

Yes, if the church hired licensed workers in conformity with the law, then the hiring was legal. If they did not, it wasn't. It certainly sounds as if the church did not or the unions would not be protesting scab labor at their sites. Are you gonna be all warm and fuzzy if the church's electrical system shorts out, causes a fire and kills the faithful?

I dunno how you come by this hatred for unions, syrenn, but where the trades are concerned it is misplaced. Without them, none of us so would much as dare ride on an elevator.

I understand what the trades are maddie.

Wrong, the ONLY way to get a license is to take the state test. That has nothing to do with the union.

If the ONLY to get a license is to be part of a union. THEN THAT IS BLACKMAIL!

And again. What if after all of this "training" you don't want to be part of the union? Does that make you any less "skilled"

alright for continuity ive quoted several excerpts from the other thread. *needs mod split buttons *

now where were we?

 

[rdean]

Whatever perceived good unions have produced in no way justifies the evil they committed during their inception.

No examples?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Unions in America as I see it.
​

The Big American unions of old did a lot of good things, not only for American workers but for workers in many countries around the world.

They also did some pretty wonderful things for the Union leadership. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

But I also believe that many of the big Unions went to far, and that the day of the big Unions should be over.

Just one more thing. There never should have been anything called a Government Employees Union.

 

[syrenn]

Unions in America as I see it.
​

The Big American unions of old did a lot of good things, not only for American workers but for workers in many countries around the world.

They also did some pretty wonderful things for the Union leadership. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

But I also believe that many of the big Unions went to far, and that the day of the big Unions should be over.

Just one more thing. There never should have been anything called a Government Employees Union.

100% agree!

Unions today are only a big business out for money. They have the power to stop competitive business how would vie for "union" jogs. They use thug tactics keep power.

I dont believe they truly care about their membership but only the dues they are receiving.

 

[code1211]

To Quantum Windbag: You see no present day value from unions? What about the workers at Walmarts who are so badly exploited?

To Defiant: How can a man or woman be liable for the sins of their great-grandparents? What about the sins of the wealthy business owners, who murdered and committed mayhem in the early days to bust unions? Are their great-grandchildren vicariously liable as well?

Past is prolugue. How we got to the point we are now at is interesting, but means nothing.

In a world economy, if unions are everywhere, then they will not make us less competitive. If not, and the products produced in non-union environments are better values than competing products produced in union environments, then the positive value of the union exists only to the competition that is winning without them.

What is the nature of the exploitation of workers at Wal-Mart? If the exploition is real, the exploited would be well served to find employment elsewhere.

 

[Defiant1]

Whatever perceived good unions have produced in no way justifies the evil they committed during their inception.

No examples?

Are you denying that union thugs have been known to commit physical violence, including murder on people just wanting to work?

 

[syrenn]

To Quantum Windbag: You see no present day value from unions? What about the workers at Walmarts who are so badly exploited?

To Defiant: How can a man or woman be liable for the sins of their great-grandparents? What about the sins of the wealthy business owners, who murdered and committed mayhem in the early days to bust unions? Are their great-grandchildren vicariously liable as well?

Past is prolugue. How we got to the point we are now at is interesting, but means nothing.

In a world economy, if unions are everywhere, then they will not make us less competitive. If not, and the products produced in non-union environments are better values than competing products produced in union environments, then the positive value of the union exists only to the competition that is winning without them.

What is the nature of the exploitation of workers at Wal-Mart? If the exploition is real, the exploited would be well served to find employment elsewhere.

They are "exploited" because the unions SAY they are. The unions label them as exploited because walmart has a HUGE union dues base that they can't touch. They are exploited because that is money that is not going into union coffers. Unions call walmart employees exploited because they are working and not sitting on their asses at home collecting welfare.

 

[Toro]

I am neither pro nor anti-union. If capital has the right to legal protected status as an organized entity, ie. a corporation, then why would labor not also have that same right?

Having said that, some unions are good and some are bad. Often, companies get the union they deserve. However, unions that are intransigent and inflexible are bad. Public sector unions are bad if they take too much of the productive capacity.

 

[code1211]

I am neither pro nor anti-union. If capital has the right to legal protected status as an organized entity, ie. a corporation, then why would labor not also have that same right?

Having said that, some unions are good and some are bad. Often, companies get the union they deserve. However, unions that are intransigent and inflexible are bad. Public sector unions are bad if they take too much of the productive capacity.

In today's workplace of multi-nationals or at least multi location companies, Unions are less and less effective. If a company has 5 factories nationally and finds that if can meet production goals by operating out of four plants, they should start a bidding war with their local unions to see which will offer the best deal. High bid gets closed.

Government workers having unions is just plain wrong. These Bozoes have the greatest benefits of any slice of society, are peopled by minorities due to affirmative action effectively segregating out those who are white, have every holiday imaginable and will get those that cannot be imagined off if requested. They have great pensions.

All of this used to be justified by the lower pay commanded by these workers, but now we find that they are making more than the resto of society AND are charging the tax payers confiscatory costs for benefits.

Why?

This is because the union has an interest in gaining something and the people with whom they negotiate are both disinterested and inexperienced. They have only one goal and that is to avoid work. If the union strikes then the management must work. No profit motivation. Put the right number on the right line and they have justified their job for another budget term and so it goes merrily along. Until there is a budget crisis.

Then the managers are cut back and the Union continues to draw the higher than the rest of us pay and the gold lined benefits.

Fire the lot of them and sub contract through open bid the services they used to conduct. This would be good advice to their brothers in the UAW who now own GM. What's wrong with paying a janitor 83 dollars per hour?

 

[George Costanza]

To Quantum Windbag: You see no present day value from unions? What about the workers at Walmarts who are so badly exploited?

Just because you, and the unions, think they are exploited does not mean that they are.

Here's the problem, right here. People have their ideas about something and, as a consequence, see the object of discussion through those glasses.