End Public Sector Unions Period.

[asterism]

I think I've got a rather unique viewpoint on this topic. I've been a Contractor, a Non-Union Employee, and am now a Union Employee (and currently department Steward) with the company that I currently work for.

I spent five years as a contractor, about eighteen months as a non-union employee, and have now been a Union employee for about three and a half years. Each one of those systems has had its positive and negative factors to it. The most positive of the Union factors.... I still have a job.

The company I work for wanted to ship my job to Syracuse, NY. Not because I can't do the job, or even because the people in Syracuse can do it better (or even as well). It's because the Syracuse workforce can produce work that is 80% of the quality of what I do for about 40% of the pay I receive. It would also take them longer to do it. The quality of the work meant nothing to the company. Only the fact that they could get a bunch of money off the books meant anything to them.

As I said, there are positives and negatives to all three of the ways I've been employed.

I've worked as a non-Union employee in two other engineering offices in the course of my life as well. In small companies, the non-Union workforce isn't that big of an issue, though there were times where nepotism and favoritism were obviously evident in both of those offices. That's the reason I chose to leave one of those companies in the first place.

In larger companies, where PROFIT is the only real interest or focus of the company, Unions still most definitely have a place in protecting and defending the rights of the workers.

I'm not saying that the Union is a panacea either. I really think that both sides need to sit down and realize that they BOTH win if the company is profitable and the employees are taken care of. All too often I see Union employees who think they work for the Union, not the company. By which I mean they're out to SCREW the company any way they can, and see their loyalty as being only to the UNION, rather than to who signs their paychecks. Likewise I see companies that are out to SCREW the Union and its employees at every turn, not realizing how much this destroys morale and workplace efficiency.

There needs to be a middle ground in these negotiations and viewpoints. A spot where the company gets to make its profits and the employees get treated fairly. I once heard a line, which I believes would be an excellent measuring stick for Union-Management negotiations.... "If, at the end of the day, everyone on both sides is equally pleased and displeased with the agreement, it's probably been done right."

Just my $0.02 for whatever it's worth.

Show us where government makes its profits then negotiate from there.

 

[Big Fitz]

American Thinker: End Public Sector Unions...Period

It's about time. I've been waiting for this debate to mature for 15 years.


The battles in Wisconsin and New Jersey over public sector union benefits are merely financial precursors to a much bigger ideological war that has been on the horizon now for years, if not decades. When you acknowledge the coming battle, you realize that Governors Walker and Christie -- courageously as they are behaving -- are only nibbling at the edges of the real issue.


And the real issue is whether public sector unions should even be allowed to exist. Frankly, when even a modicum of common sense is infused into the equation, the answer is a resounding no. And the foundational reason is simple. There is no one at the bargaining table representing the folks who are actually going to pay whatever is negotiated.


Gee, what could possibly go wrong?

No one at the bargaining table representing the folks who are actually going to pay whatever is negotiated." Outstanding..

I am okay with Public Sector Unions under one of two conditions.

1. They are banned from all political usages of money and resources and labor. This way they cannot subvert the process of selecting those who will ultimately negotiate with them and their contracts.

2. The taxpayers gets to have a public referendum vote on any contract that's out there to accept or 'veto' any public sector union contract. This then counteracts any corruptive influence the union may have had on the elected official negotiating on behalf of the taxpayer.

Do either one of those two things, and I have no problems with them existing.

 

[Bfgrn]

I'm not interested in being fair, or moderate.

End all unions. Make each individual bargain based only on his own merit. If you suck as an employee, you don't deserve increased pay and benefits. If you work hard and efficient, you get rewarded.

If a company doesn't reward good employees, then good employees leave for better jobs at their competition. Thus, the company has it in their best interest to retain the best employees.

By only having individual bargaining, employers can single out their best employees for the best treatment, and get rid of the slack and lazy weight.

End all unions, slowly but surely. We won, and will keep winning, more and more elections. This is step one to the road to conservatism. We have the momentum, and will win.

I appreciate your honesty buc-o. So...with the public employees, who will make these personnel decisions?

 

[Anachronism]

Show us where government makes its profits then negotiate from there.

Government is not intended to make a profit. HOWEVER, it still must pay its workers a wage sufficient to make people want to do the work, and to allow them to support themselves and their family.

Personally, I think that the biggest issue is in terms of the benefits that a lot of these people receive. They are in many cases well beyond even what a private sector Union member could ever hope to negotiate.

The problem is that there has become an "entitlement" mentality to those in the Government workforce, whether they're Union employees or not. THAT is what really needs to be done away with.

 

[Bfgrn]

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here, but would a superintendent have to sit down and negotiate the contracts of 1000+ employees? Reality check folks.

I predict that next year most high school teachers will have to teach 6 classes instead of 5. There will be longer school days and longer years. Teachers will contribute more to pension and health insurance. This will cost the avg teacher around 10-15K a year. And the teachers will will bitch but they'll make do.

Yet with all this "shared sacrifice" I still predict the public will not be satisfied. Why? Because Johnny still won't be able to read. Yep there's no money. But as I've said over and over again, this will not "fix" our educational system. Union busting has nothing to do with "the children" and everything to do with politics. Pretending otherwise is disingenuous and probably counter productive.

Good post chanel.

I would be willing to bet the motivation of most people who decide to become a teacher is not for financial gain or greed. It is a belief in giving, not taking.

It is really sad to see American citizens turn on their fellow countrymen. I am also willing to bet that these same people wouldn't be successful as 'individuals' without the mentoring, caring and giving teachers gave to THEM.

Education is the cheap defense of nations.
Edmund Burke

 

[JohnnyApplesack]

End Public Sector Unions Period.

Ailes and Oxyrush sure did a number on you. When even a relatively small percentage of the electorate suffers this level of gross ignorance - not a good sign at all. Indicates any 'free press' is pretty much gone, and our Strumpetocracy is gaining strength.

wow

 

[The T]

End Public Sector Unions Period.

Ailes and Oxyrush sure did a number on you. When even a relatively small percentage of the electorate suffers this level of gross ignorance - not a good sign at all. Indicates any 'free press' is pretty much gone, and our Strumpetocracy is gaining strength.

wow

Project much? How the Hell would you know what that poster listens to or watches?

 

[boedicca]

End Public Sector Unions Period.

Ailes and Oxyrush sure did a number on you. When even a relatively small percentage of the electorate suffers this level of gross ignorance - not a good sign at all. Indicates any 'free press' is pretty much gone, and our Strumpetocracy is gaining strength.

wow

Project much? How the Hell would you know what that poster listens to or watches?

He's just a garden variety foaming at the mouth moonbat. He assumes things that fit his worldview without having any facts.

"Facts are for the Little People."

 

[Wry Catcher]

Wisconsin voters have already had it with the Statist Democrats and why they elected the present governor whom is doing what was asked of him.

~Go figure.

California voters elected Arnold in a wave of emotion, Arnold attempted to rule as an autocrat too; the voters slapped him silly and will do the same to Walker.
As for your ignorant brothers and sisters who call for wholesale firings, this is one more example of emotion overruling reason. Don't you guys on the right ever think about the consequences - intended and otherwise - of the things you wish to see happen?

The Jerkinator was/is a Repubican/RINO.

LOL. When elected the conservatives went GaGa over Arnold, even discussed a contitutional amendment which would allow him to run for POTUS. Arnold soon learned governing was different than running for governor and ponitification and brinkmanship didn't work. It took years but he finally learned to compromise, learned to study issues and seek win-win compromise and reject zero sum games; and, most of all he learned to listen to his wife. A good idea for anyone running for officer, or not running for office, IMO.

 

[Jroc]

California voters elected Arnold in a wave of emotion, Arnold attempted to rule as an autocrat too; the voters slapped him silly and will do the same to Walker.
As for your ignorant brothers and sisters who call for wholesale firings, this is one more example of emotion overruling reason. Don't you guys on the right ever think about the consequences - intended and otherwise - of the things you wish to see happen?

The Jerkinator was/is a Repubican/RINO.

LOL. When elected the conservatives went GaGa over Arnold, even discussed a contitutional amendment which would allow him to run for POTUS. Arnold soon learned governing was different than running for governor and ponitification and brinkmanship didn't work. It took years but he finally learned to compromise, learned to study issues and seek win-win compromise and reject zero sum games; and, most of all he learned to listen to his wife. A good idea for anyone running for officer, or not running for office, IMO.

You're delusional, Arnold was a failed governor no matter how you look at it. And no, most conservative didn't like Arnold they just figured that he was the best you could hope for in the most liberal state in the union. I guess they were wrong.

 

[JFK_USA]

You may not 'need' unions, but we who work on the factory floor know damned well that without the unions, we would be working for next to nothing. And in conditions that are unsafe. It took unions to create decent wages and working conditions. It takes unions to maintain them.

California Girl didn't pay attention that day in history class when the Industrial Revolution took place. Doesn't believe they exploited child labor and general labor by paying them pennies.

Without Unions, no one is able to put together enough to fight deregulation of labor which brings sweat shops to America. Pay them nothing, unsafe working conditions, and no way to get any fair compensation ever.

 

[The T]

The Jerkinator was/is a Repubican/RINO.

LOL. When elected the conservatives went GaGa over Arnold, even discussed a contitutional amendment which would allow him to run for POTUS. Arnold soon learned governing was different than running for governor and ponitification and brinkmanship didn't work. It took years but he finally learned to compromise, learned to study issues and seek win-win compromise and reject zero sum games; and, most of all he learned to listen to his wife. A good idea for anyone running for officer, or not running for office, IMO.

You're delusional, Arnold was a failed governor no matter how you look at it. And no, most conservative didn't like Arnold they just figured that he was the best you could hope for in the most liberal state in the union. I guess they were wrong.

And FAIL, the Jerkinator did.

 

[Chris]

American Thinker: End Public Sector Unions...Period

It's about time. I've been waiting for this debate to mature for 15 years.


The battles in Wisconsin and New Jersey over public sector union benefits are merely financial precursors to a much bigger ideological war that has been on the horizon now for years, if not decades. When you acknowledge the coming battle, you realize that Governors Walker and Christie -- courageously as they are behaving -- are only nibbling at the edges of the real issue.


And the real issue is whether public sector unions should even be allowed to exist. Frankly, when even a modicum of common sense is infused into the equation, the answer is a resounding no. And the foundational reason is simple. There is no one at the bargaining table representing the folks who are actually going to pay whatever is negotiated.


Gee, what could possibly go wrong?

No one at the bargaining table representing the folks who are actually going to pay whatever is negotiated." Outstanding..

Does this mean the end of the U.S. military too?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

You may not 'need' unions, but we who work on the factory floor know damned well that without the unions, we would be working for next to nothing. And in conditions that are unsafe. It took unions to create decent wages and working conditions. It takes unions to maintain them.

California Girl didn't pay attention that day in history class when the Industrial Revolution took place. Doesn't believe they exploited child labor and general labor by paying them pennies.

Without Unions, no one is able to put together enough to fight deregulation of labor which brings sweat shops to America. Pay them nothing, unsafe working conditions, and no way to get any fair compensation ever.

Wow... how long have you been stuck in 1918? I guessing a product of public schools and the teachers' union?



Good fucking grief you lefties are dumb.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Sorry kids... the unions are a thing of the past. They serve no propose but to promote and protect mediocrity.

 

[The T]

Sorry kids... the unions are a thing of the past. They serve no propose but to promote and protect mediocrity.

And Legal/Generational THEFT

 

[JFK_USA]

American Thinker: End Public Sector Unions...Period

It's about time. I've been waiting for this debate to mature for 15 years.


The battles in Wisconsin and New Jersey over public sector union benefits are merely financial precursors to a much bigger ideological war that has been on the horizon now for years, if not decades. When you acknowledge the coming battle, you realize that Governors Walker and Christie -- courageously as they are behaving -- are only nibbling at the edges of the real issue.


And the real issue is whether public sector unions should even be allowed to exist. Frankly, when even a modicum of common sense is infused into the equation, the answer is a resounding no. And the foundational reason is simple. There is no one at the bargaining table representing the folks who are actually going to pay whatever is negotiated.


Gee, what could possibly go wrong?

No one at the bargaining table representing the folks who are actually going to pay whatever is negotiated." Outstanding..

I am okay with Public Sector Unions under one of two conditions.

1. They are banned from all political usages of money and resources and labor. This way they cannot subvert the process of selecting those who will ultimately negotiate with them and their contracts.

2. The taxpayers gets to have a public referendum vote on any contract that's out there to accept or 'veto' any public sector union contract. This then counteracts any corruptive influence the union may have had on the elected official negotiating on behalf of the taxpayer.

Do either one of those two things, and I have no problems with them existing.

The only thing I agree with somewhat is #2. If corporations are allowed to give unlimited amounts to campaigns, why would we not extend that same rights to workers?

#2 is tough to do because then you are trying to villainize unions that they get alot. Plus how can you fit an entire contract on a voting ballot? Most of this would fall on party lines and dependent on which party is more motivated to vote. One thing ACORN did very well was to put ballot measures on ballots that favor liberal voters coming out and voting like raising the minimum wage. Conservative groups do this as well with gay marriage and eliminating state earning tax referendums.

So I can see where it can benefit either party during an election. But if it were me, the union contracts would have to be in a November election. If it doesn't pass, the contract is renewed for 1 year at the same levels and benefits of the current contract until a deal gets done that is approved by voters. This way real politics doesn't get in the way of workers having a decent pay and rights.

 

[JohnnyApplesack]

How the Hell would you know what that poster listens to or watches?

That tired canned right wing rhetoric gives the parrot away, dumbass.

wow

 

[JohnnyApplesack]

BTW, always interesting to see these brainwashed bagged out dopes claim they never watch Fixed News or hang on The Drugster's every word. They're obviously embarrassed as hell.

 

[WillowTree]

How the Hell would you know what that poster listens to or watches?

That tired canned right wing rhetoric gives the parrot away, dumbass.

wow

Hey MORON, did you ever answer to YES I'm for FORCED UNIONIZATION or NO I'm AGAINST FORCED UNIONIZATION?? welldidyahuh? we'll wait