Labor Unions...Good or Bad?

[Jarhead]

If unions were gone, how long would those laws stay around?

Think of a story you heard about someone being screwed over at work. I can guarantee it was not a union position.

the key word of your statement is "story"...

I have never met someone who was screwed over at work whoi did not deserve it.

Work hard, dont use all of your sick days, show a high interest level in what you do, dont complain about how much you hate your job...and you wont get screwed over.

Not really considered rocket science.

Uhm, screwed over kind of implies they didn't deserve it. They were doing all the things you suggested, and still got fired due to "budget cuts" or some other bull shit.

let me ask you a question...

Lets say you had a landscaper who came to your home opnce a week....mowed, edged and weeded for you.

The following year you forecasted a tough year financailly. Nothing devastatikng, but you were going to have to cut some things out.

You have a choice.....fire the landscaper and have your 16 year old sonm do the work OR not be able to go on the annual family vacation you go on.

What would you do?

Now...of course...you are going to say you would not go on the vacation becuase it wouldnt be fair to the landscaper.

But you and I know that is BS.

 

[manifold]

Unions force a work environement where the best trend to the least acceptable.

Jim and Joe both get 6 sick days.
Jim uses all of them...3 as additional vacation days.
Joe uses only 3 of them....and loses the other threee...but hey...he was onlyh sick 3 days.

They both get the same raise per union contract.

Next year both Jim AND Joe use all of their sick days, even though neither one was sick for more than 3 days.

Time is money. Why is it ok for corporations to maximize profit but not laborers?

you missed my point.

Not sure how though. It really was not so difficult to grasp.

But whatever.

Have a great day.

I got your point just fine. You think Jim was a bad influence on Joe. I'm saying why is what Jim did wrong? And why shouldn't Joe do it too? Why shouldn't they be allowed to maximize the return on their own investment of time?

 

[Jarhead]

Unions force a work environement where the best trend to the least acceptable.

Jim and Joe both get 6 sick days.
Jim uses all of them...3 as additional vacation days.
Joe uses only 3 of them....and loses the other threee...but hey...he was onlyh sick 3 days.

They both get the same raise per union contract.

Next year both Jim AND Joe use all of their sick days, even though neither one was sick for more than 3 days.

Unions don't force one raise for all workers. They set a minimum. Companies can, and do, give higher raises based on merit.

It's amazing how little you guys actually know about unions.

YOU ARE 100% WRONG.

Wow....and you criticized me.

Asshole.

 

[Jarhead]

Time is money. Why is it ok for corporations to maximize profit but not laborers?

you missed my point.

Not sure how though. It really was not so difficult to grasp.

But whatever.

Have a great day.

I got your point just fine. You think Jim was a bad influence on Joe. I'm saying why is what Jim did wrong? And why shouldn't Joe do it too? Why shouldn't they be allowed to maximize the return on their own investment of time?

Becuase in their union contract the "sick days" are slated as "days you are too sick to come in"

So Jim and Joe are in breach of their contract.....thats why it is wrong.

 

[Peach]

If unions were gone, how long would those laws stay around?

Think of a story you heard about someone being screwed over at work. I can guarantee it was not a union position.

I really enjoy these undefined terms.

By screwed over...do you mean treated unfairly ?

How is that gauged ?

Here you go.

If someone works at a company 20 years, with a solid work record, should the company be allowed to fire him so they can bring in someone younger and cheaper?

If the company chooses to bring in young, inexperienced employees, it will be reflected in company output. But, without unions, and agreements to rein in owners whims, of course the individual can be fired.

Unions are one of the best developments to have occurred in this nation; individuals therein can be corrupt, no question.

 

[Jarhead]

Time is money. Why is it ok for corporations to maximize profit but not laborers?

you missed my point.

Not sure how though. It really was not so difficult to grasp.

But whatever.

Have a great day.

I got your point just fine. You think Jim was a bad influence on Joe. I'm saying why is what Jim did wrong? And why shouldn't Joe do it too? Why shouldn't they be allowed to maximize the return on their own investment of time?

And you are wrong....my point was NOT that Jim was a bad influence on Joe.

My point was that Joe did not see any return for being ethical...and actually got LESS time off than the unethical one.

 

[manifold]

you missed my point.

Not sure how though. It really was not so difficult to grasp.

But whatever.

Have a great day.

I got your point just fine. You think Jim was a bad influence on Joe. I'm saying why is what Jim did wrong? And why shouldn't Joe do it too? Why shouldn't they be allowed to maximize the return on their own investment of time?

Becuase in their union contract the "sick days" are slated as "days you are too sick to come in"

So Jim and Joe are in breach of their contract.....thats why it is wrong.

So it's just a matter of the fine print then. Got it.

I guess you weren't actually expecting to have your idiot notion challenged.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Unions force a work environement where the best trend to the least acceptable.

Jim and Joe both get 6 sick days.
Jim uses all of them...3 as additional vacation days.
Joe uses only 3 of them....and loses the other threee...but hey...he was onlyh sick 3 days.

They both get the same raise per union contract.

Next year both Jim AND Joe use all of their sick days, even though neither one was sick for more than 3 days.

Unions don't force one raise for all workers. They set a minimum. Companies can, and do, give higher raises based on merit.

It's amazing how little you guys actually know about unions.

YOU ARE 100% WRONG.

Wow....and you criticized me.

Asshole.

How am I wrong? I've seen plenty of union employees get raises over and above the contracted amount.

 

[Dick Tuck]

the key word of your statement is "story"...

I have never met someone who was screwed over at work whoi did not deserve it.

Work hard, dont use all of your sick days, show a high interest level in what you do, dont complain about how much you hate your job...and you wont get screwed over.

Not really considered rocket science.

Uhm, screwed over kind of implies they didn't deserve it. They were doing all the things you suggested, and still got fired due to "budget cuts" or some other bull shit.

let me ask you a question...

Lets say you had a landscaper who came to your home opnce a week....mowed, edged and weeded for you.

The following year you forecasted a tough year financailly. Nothing devastatikng, but you were going to have to cut some things out.

You have a choice.....fire the landscaper and have your 16 year old sonm do the work OR not be able to go on the annual family vacation you go on.

What would you do?

Now...of course...you are going to say you would not go on the vacation becuase it wouldnt be fair to the landscaper.

But you and I know that is BS.

Did I sign a multiyear contract with the landscaper? If I did, and made a dumb choice, should I be able to back out of that contract? If it's little Willie down the street, I could say don't cut my grass for two weeks, because I'll be out of town on vacation. Or you and little Willie could come to some agreement where he'd take care of it while you were away, and you'd honor the agreement when you returned.

What the fuck is your point?

 

[manifold]

you missed my point.

Not sure how though. It really was not so difficult to grasp.

But whatever.

Have a great day.

I got your point just fine. You think Jim was a bad influence on Joe. I'm saying why is what Jim did wrong? And why shouldn't Joe do it too? Why shouldn't they be allowed to maximize the return on their own investment of time?

And you are wrong....my point was NOT that Jim was a bad influence on Joe.

My point was that Joe did not see any return for being ethical...and actually got LESS time off than the unethical one.

You blabber on about what is ethical as if your opinion on the matter is the only word.

 

[Skull Pilot]

ok.... less then 300 words



bad.

Allow me to expand.

Profit > People.

You make it sound as if people have no choice but to work for an employer who treats them poorly.

You happen to be wrong.

Unions are why a minor bathroom renovation in government owned home for the disabled costs 37K when it would only cost a private business 5K.

 

[Dick Tuck]

you missed my point.

Not sure how though. It really was not so difficult to grasp.

But whatever.

Have a great day.

I got your point just fine. You think Jim was a bad influence on Joe. I'm saying why is what Jim did wrong? And why shouldn't Joe do it too? Why shouldn't they be allowed to maximize the return on their own investment of time?

And you are wrong....my point was NOT that Jim was a bad influence on Joe.

My point was that Joe did not see any return for being ethical...and actually got LESS time off than the unethical one.

It's not about ethical, it's about the freedom to enter into a contract under law. Why do you hate that?

 

[DontBeStupid]

I got your point just fine. You think Jim was a bad influence on Joe. I'm saying why is what Jim did wrong? And why shouldn't Joe do it too? Why shouldn't they be allowed to maximize the return on their own investment of time?

And you are wrong....my point was NOT that Jim was a bad influence on Joe.

My point was that Joe did not see any return for being ethical...and actually got LESS time off than the unethical one.

It's not about ethical, it's about the freedom to enter into a contract under law. Why do you hate that?

I don't think he hates it. I think he doesn't understand it.

 

[Jarhead]

I got your point just fine. You think Jim was a bad influence on Joe. I'm saying why is what Jim did wrong? And why shouldn't Joe do it too? Why shouldn't they be allowed to maximize the return on their own investment of time?

Becuase in their union contract the "sick days" are slated as "days you are too sick to come in"

So Jim and Joe are in breach of their contract.....thats why it is wrong.

So it's just a matter of the fine print then. Got it.

I guess you weren't actually expecting to have your idiot notion challenged.

you challanged it and I responded...and you consider an employee being in breach of his contract as nothing but "fine print"...making you way too immature to debate with.

So I am done with you sparky.

 

[Jarhead]

I got your point just fine. You think Jim was a bad influence on Joe. I'm saying why is what Jim did wrong? And why shouldn't Joe do it too? Why shouldn't they be allowed to maximize the return on their own investment of time?

And you are wrong....my point was NOT that Jim was a bad influence on Joe.

My point was that Joe did not see any return for being ethical...and actually got LESS time off than the unethical one.

It's not about ethical, it's about the freedom to enter into a contract under law. Why do you hate that?

it is not about ethical?

You enter into contract under law...you sign siad contract...and you lie and say you are sick when you are not......and you dont see that as an issue of ethics?

Wow....another child I am debating with.

No wonder you cant grasp the whole idea of personaol responsibility.

 

[Jarhead]

I got your point just fine. You think Jim was a bad influence on Joe. I'm saying why is what Jim did wrong? And why shouldn't Joe do it too? Why shouldn't they be allowed to maximize the return on their own investment of time?

And you are wrong....my point was NOT that Jim was a bad influence on Joe.

My point was that Joe did not see any return for being ethical...and actually got LESS time off than the unethical one.

You blabber on about what is ethical as if your opinion on the matter is the only word.

ahhh...so you do not see it as unethical for an employee to call in sick and get paid for the day even though said employee is not sick, but instead wanted to take an extra day off.

Speaks volumes about you.

 

[Jarhead]

Uhm, screwed over kind of implies they didn't deserve it. They were doing all the things you suggested, and still got fired due to "budget cuts" or some other bull shit.

let me ask you a question...

Lets say you had a landscaper who came to your home opnce a week....mowed, edged and weeded for you.

The following year you forecasted a tough year financailly. Nothing devastatikng, but you were going to have to cut some things out.

You have a choice.....fire the landscaper and have your 16 year old sonm do the work OR not be able to go on the annual family vacation you go on.

What would you do?

Now...of course...you are going to say you would not go on the vacation becuase it wouldnt be fair to the landscaper.

But you and I know that is BS.

Did I sign a multiyear contract with the landscaper? If I did, and made a dumb choice, should I be able to back out of that contract? If it's little Willie down the street, I could say don't cut my grass for two weeks, because I'll be out of town on vacation. Or you and little Willie could come to some agreement where he'd take care of it while you were away, and you'd honor the agreement when you returned.

What the fuck is your point?

wow...what a childish diversion....I mean....wow.....

too difficult for you to anbswer the question.

And you ask what is my point?

That means you are not only a child...but you are somewhat illiterate as well.

Cya moron...no time for childish debating.....

 

[Dick Tuck]

And you are wrong....my point was NOT that Jim was a bad influence on Joe.

My point was that Joe did not see any return for being ethical...and actually got LESS time off than the unethical one.

It's not about ethical, it's about the freedom to enter into a contract under law. Why do you hate that?

it is not about ethical?

You enter into contract under law...you sign siad contract...and you lie and say you are sick when you are not......and you dont see that as an issue of ethics?

Wow....another child I am debating with.

No wonder you cant grasp the whole idea of personaol responsibility.

If you lie under contract, that's a gimme tort.

If you agree to to a contract, with no lies, that's a contract.

Why do you want government to cancel contracts, and give corporations an edge? Is that too tough a question for your?

 

[DontBeStupid]

let me ask you a question...

Lets say you had a landscaper who came to your home opnce a week....mowed, edged and weeded for you.

The following year you forecasted a tough year financailly. Nothing devastatikng, but you were going to have to cut some things out.

You have a choice.....fire the landscaper and have your 16 year old sonm do the work OR not be able to go on the annual family vacation you go on.

What would you do?

Now...of course...you are going to say you would not go on the vacation becuase it wouldnt be fair to the landscaper.

But you and I know that is BS.

Did I sign a multiyear contract with the landscaper? If I did, and made a dumb choice, should I be able to back out of that contract? If it's little Willie down the street, I could say don't cut my grass for two weeks, because I'll be out of town on vacation. Or you and little Willie could come to some agreement where he'd take care of it while you were away, and you'd honor the agreement when you returned.

What the fuck is your point?

wow...what a childish diversion....I mean....wow.....

too difficult for you to anbswer the question.

And you ask what is my point?

That means you are not only a child...but you are somewhat illiterate as well.

Cya moron...no time for childish debating.....

How about some adult debating? I can't help but notice you are choosing to not respond to me. Care to answer the question I posed earlier?

If someone works at a company 20 years, with a solid work record, should the company be allowed to fire him so they can bring in someone younger and cheaper?

 

[Trajan]

Are labor unions good or bad for capitalism and economic growth?

Explain in 300 words or less, please.

Labour unions are bad for capitalism and economic growth because they force companies to view their workers as people. Companies would be so much more profitable if they could work a 14-year old to death. Unions prevent that.

why didn't you just say that in the OP and skip the poll