The Unions are anti-America.

[tigerbob]

The Unions are anti-America.

BTW, the scenario you describe is not anti-America. It could perhaps be better argued that the almost unbridled power employers enjoyed before unions existed was anti American.

 

[sealybobo]

You're a freakin' broken record.

Did you create this thread? Unions are anti American?

And you have the balls to call me a broken record? You guys have been bashing unions for 30 years.

Reagan started it with firing the air controllers..since then the neo cons have tried to destroy every union. Neo cons are scum that do thier best to kill the middle class. They worship the richest of us even though most of them are poor as church mice. They are ignorant assholes that vote against thier own best interests because they are told to do so by radio talk show hosts getting paid millions by corporations that supposedly benefit by cheap labor.

Do people attack you for saying such things? Because I say that kind of stuff and they attack me for it. I LOVE IT!! Are you new? Huggy's my new buddy!!

PS. I do not argue that the uaw union people are HORRIBLE. Not all of them, but far too many of them are HORRIBLE lazy fucks. They should have cared more about the company and less about getting away with shit. But then, same goes for the executives.

And not just at union companies.

Consider this. Consider that CEO's of most companies are overpaid and lazy and stupid.

And pay attention, because they aren't just sending unions jobs to mexico and india.

So they don't just think that unions are overpaid and lazy. They think that about all American labor.

 

[editec]

The Unions are anti-America.

This is how they operate. Think about it and you decide.
1. Unions don't believe in profit.
2. Unions don't believe in employee incentives for hard working people to make more than lazy employees.

So...therefore, UAW to run the auto industry is like having the fox run the chicken coup.

The way unions work....they encourage their employees to be as non productive as they can...therefore the company has to hire more people to do the job. Like having four people doing the job of one.

This being said...how can a business stay in business with this philosophy?

The unions are, to some degree, responsible for the predicament within which the auto industry now finds itself.

To some degree that is true, I quite agree. The contracts of the past when America was fat and happy are now too expensive for the auto industry which is in deep trouble.

But you paint a picture that is in many ways both untrue and unfair.

Yes, they do.

The role of unions is to represent the interests of their members. When times are good, the job of the unions is fairly easy. Get more benefits, higher pay and more time off. In current conditions, the job of unions is much tougher as they have to balance what they would normally ask for with the more basic need of keeping their members employed.

Remarkably observant, Tiger.

The fox and henhouse analogy only works if you are suggesting the fox is smart enough to realize he's going to die of starvation if he kills all the chickens. Might be worth crediting the UAW with a few more brain cells that that.

Given that the UAW has been giving managment one concession after the other to help keep the industry alive, I'd say that's correct, too.

Unions have their place in this society, but they, just as we all do, have to modify their behaviors as economic circumstances change.

Seems to me that unions have given a lot back even as management was giving themselves fat bonuses for losing money.

 

[tigerbob]

The Unions are anti-America.

This is how they operate. Think about it and you decide.
1. Unions don't believe in profit.
2. Unions don't believe in employee incentives for hard working people to make more than lazy employees.

So...therefore, UAW to run the auto industry is like having the fox run the chicken coup.

The way unions work....they encourage their employees to be as non productive as they can...therefore the company has to hire more people to do the job. Like having four people doing the job of one.

This being said...how can a business stay in business with this philosophy?

To some degree that is true, I quite agree. The contracts of the past when America was fat and happy are now too expensive for the auto industry which is in deep trouble.





Yes, they do.



Remarkably observant, Tiger.

The fox and henhouse analogy only works if you are suggesting the fox is smart enough to realize he's going to die of starvation if he kills all the chickens. Might be worth crediting the UAW with a few more brain cells that that.

Given that the UAW has been giving managment one concession after the other to help keep the industry alive, I'd say that's correct, too.

Unions have their place in this society, but they, just as we all do, have to modify their behaviors as economic circumstances change.

Seems to me that unions have given a lot back even as management was giving themselves fat bonuses for losing money.

I agree, the unions seem to have taken it on the chin. That said, the UAW's chin acquired a lot of extra padding over a number of years!!!

Still, they've taken positive steps so IMO they deserve credit for that.

 

[Xenophon]

Unions are anti-capitalist, not anti-american.

'American' is basically anything Americans do or like, since they do/like unions they can't be anti-american.

 

[jillian]

Unions are anti-capitalist, not anti-american.

'American' is basically anything Americans do or like, since they do/like unions they can't be anti-american.

anti-capitalist?

i'd say they like earning money, too.

i might modify what you said by saying they don't like laissez faire capitalism.

That's probably fair.

 

[Pyrite]

In a capitalist society, laborers, just like any other people, deserve the best compensation for their labor they can negotiate. A union is a tool for negotiation. When their bargaining position is good, they get to make demands. when it's bad, they have to make concessions. that's how commerce works, and anything less than that is a form of coercion intended to extract work from the laborer for less than his asking price would be if he were informed and organized.

 

[mattskramer]

What does the term "anti-American" mean? Is this what it means?

I doubt that any American organization is truely anti-American. Individuals and organizations simply have different ideas on how America can be even better?

Try this: Which organization is anti-American -
The Brady Campaign or the National Rifle Association?

Brady Campaign - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
National Rifle Association - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't count either organization as anti-American. Each side simply has opposing ideas on what is best for America. Similarly neither the liberals nor the conservatives are anti-America. They simply hold to different points on the political spectrum.

Now, can we hold down the silly rhetoric and hyperbole.

 

[manu1959]

when you join a union who gets rich....you or the union boss.....

 

[Indiana Oracle]

Unions and management. both, took everything they could get from what they all figured was an immortal cash cow. They were wrong. Pendulums always swing back. It is too simplistic to blame the auto industry's woes on unions alone.

 

[sealybobo]

when you join a union who gets rich....you or the union boss.....

My immigrant dad worked for Ford for 20 years. Before Ford, the best job he could find as a cook was $8 hr. At Ford he made $15, got the best pension & benefits you ever could imagine, profit sharing, discount on cars, etc.

He saved enough that he has enough money that he NEVER has to worry again, even if he lost his pension. In fact, he bought a second home on Port Huron.

He's not rich, but he is the American dream.

 

[mattskramer]

when you join a union who gets rich....you or the union boss.....

Union Pay Is Higher in Nearly All Occupational Groups

Union Members Summary

In 2008, among full-time wage and salary workers, union members had
median usual weekly earnings of $886 while those who were not repre-
sented by unions had median weekly earnings of $691.

 

[mattskramer]

Help. Please edit the size of my picture.

 

[sealybobo]

Unions and management. both, took everything they could get from what they all figured was an immortal cash cow. They were wrong. Pendulums always swing back. It is too simplistic to blame the auto industry's woes on unions alone.

Right. Aren't we seeing non union companies having problems now too?

And I bet all of those non union companies have overpaid CEO's. So how come right wingers aren't talking about the thousands of non union companies that are struggling? WHat is their problem if not unions?

I think when people bash unions, they are basically bashing all labor. Unions are just easier to attack. Don't worry, we're next.

 

[Indiana Oracle]

Unions and management. both, took everything they could get from what they all figured was an immortal cash cow. They were wrong. Pendulums always swing back. It is too simplistic to blame the auto industry's woes on unions alone.

Right. Aren't we seeing non union companies having problems now too?

And I bet all of those non union companies have overpaid CEO's. So how come right wingers aren't talking about the thousands of non union companies that are struggling? WHat is their problem if not unions?

I think when people bash unions, they are basically bashing all labor. Unions are just easier to attack. Don't worry, we're next.

Agree that there are instances where CEO compensation is out of whack against perceived value added - particularly in the financial industry. Beyond that industry, there is little of this sort of thing. Have been a CEO and know this to be a fact.

"Fixing" this via government intervention, IMHO, is inadvisable as government tends to be a blunt instrument and unintended consequences follow most of what they do to control society. Boards control CEO comp. Public pressure and outrage will force the change over time. I am sure we will see more websites dedicated to this in the future. The issue is by no means dead.

That said, any company taking taxpayer money should be subjected to a comp review at the 'C' level. Frankly, I don't think this or any administration will have the courage to actually do it. They are all in bed with eachother. But we shall see.

 

[sealybobo]

Unions and management. both, took everything they could get from what they all figured was an immortal cash cow. They were wrong. Pendulums always swing back. It is too simplistic to blame the auto industry's woes on unions alone.

Right. Aren't we seeing non union companies having problems now too?

And I bet all of those non union companies have overpaid CEO's. So how come right wingers aren't talking about the thousands of non union companies that are struggling? WHat is their problem if not unions?

I think when people bash unions, they are basically bashing all labor. Unions are just easier to attack. Don't worry, we're next.

Agree that there are instances where CEO compensation is out of whack against perceived value added - particularly in the financial industry. Beyond that industry, there is little of this sort of thing. Have been a CEO and know this to be a fact.

"Fixing" this via government intervention, IMHO, is inadvisable as government tends to be a blunt instrument and unintended consequences follow most of what they do to control society. Boards control CEO comp. Public pressure and outrage will force the change over time. I am sure we will see more websites dedicated to this in the future. The issue is by no means dead.

That said, any company taking taxpayer money should be subjected to a comp review at the 'C' level. Frankly, I don't think this or any administration will have the courage to actually do it. They are all in bed with eachother. But we shall see.

I have Hoovers, so I can look up any CEO's pay. And maybe you are right that CEO pay isn't out of control when it comes to medium and small size companies, but you are wrong when it comes to the big boys like HP, Home Depot, Pharma CEO's, Drug companies, defense, Big 3, Bankers, Stocks, Insurance, etc.

Sorry, but like my VP brother, I believe you are tainted and can't speak on this without bias. Neither can he. He agrees with me on a lot, but not when I say we need to limit CEO pay, because one day he hopes to be a CEO.

And he works for an auto supplier who's going thru bankruptsy. He left Visteon. Visteon was on the verge of collapse and every executive was fighting for their bonus'. No one was trying to solve any problems, other than how do they get a bigger bonus. And these white collar people are not union workers.

It is happening a lot more than you think. Just because you are a CEO of one company, doesn't mean you know. That's like John McCain saying he'd be a better Commander & Chief because he got captured and tortured. That doesn't make him an expert on war.

Yes, we have tried many many times to deal with excessive CEO pay, and everytime we try to fix it, we make things worse. Seen tons of studies on this. Limit the pay and then they just give them stock options, blabla. Long story short, this sort of thing helped cause the mess we are in now. Because CEO's used to worry about the long term success of the company. Today, they worry about short term so they can cash out their stocks.

Boards are made up of CEO's of other companies.

It's a fucking scam!!!

This is the good old boys network and I don't like it. They need to be broken up.

 

[amrchaos]

The Unions are anti-America.

This is how they operate. Think about it and you decide.
1. Unions don't believe in profit.
2. Unions don't believe in employee incentives for hard working people to make more than lazy employees.

So...therefore, UAW to run the auto industry is like having the fox run the chicken coup.

The way unions work....they encourage their employees to be as non productive as they can...therefore the company has to hire more people to do the job. Like having four people doing the job of one.

This being said...how can a business stay in business with this philosophy?

If I wanted to see Sean Hannity's or Rupert Murdoch' or King Saud's opinion I would watch Fox News.

You are an idiot...You obviously do not know anything about unions that wasn't spoon fed to you from the filthy neo con christian fascist talking points. Thanks for regurjitating it on my computor screen. Anybody have an easy wipe?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

Maybe if you did listen and watch Hannity and Fox ...you may learn something.

You can say what you want ....the government has a lot of laws to protect employees rights....but you can't dispute their philosophy...
That's why the auto industry is in a jam and bailing them out again and again will not help.

If you can't get this ...you don't have common sense.

I remember watching Fox and one of their anchors exclaimed that the Earth was 6000 years old.

After that, I made it a point not to watch Fox. The Sci-fi Channel is more believable!!

 

[Indiana Oracle]

Right. Aren't we seeing non union companies having problems now too?

And I bet all of those non union companies have overpaid CEO's. So how come right wingers aren't talking about the thousands of non union companies that are struggling? WHat is their problem if not unions?

I think when people bash unions, they are basically bashing all labor. Unions are just easier to attack. Don't worry, we're next.

Agree that there are instances where CEO compensation is out of whack against perceived value added - particularly in the financial industry. Beyond that industry, there is little of this sort of thing. Have been a CEO and know this to be a fact.

"Fixing" this via government intervention, IMHO, is inadvisable as government tends to be a blunt instrument and unintended consequences follow most of what they do to control society. Boards control CEO comp. Public pressure and outrage will force the change over time. I am sure we will see more websites dedicated to this in the future. The issue is by no means dead.

That said, any company taking taxpayer money should be subjected to a comp review at the 'C' level. Frankly, I don't think this or any administration will have the courage to actually do it. They are all in bed with eachother. But we shall see.

I have Hoovers, so I can look up any CEO's pay. And maybe you are right that CEO pay isn't out of control when it comes to medium and small size companies, but you are wrong when it comes to the big boys like HP, Home Depot, Pharma CEO's, Drug companies, defense, Big 3, Bankers, Stocks, Insurance, etc.

Sorry, but like my VP brother, I believe you are tainted and can't speak on this without bias. Neither can he. He agrees with me on a lot, but not when I say we need to limit CEO pay, because one day he hopes to be a CEO.

And he works for an auto supplier who's going thru bankruptsy. He left Visteon. Visteon was on the verge of collapse and every executive was fighting for their bonus'. No one was trying to solve any problems, other than how do they get a bigger bonus. And these white collar people are not union workers.

It is happening a lot more than you think. Just because you are a CEO of one company, doesn't mean you know. That's like John McCain saying he'd be a better Commander & Chief because he got captured and tortured. That doesn't make him an expert on war.

Yes, we have tried many many times to deal with excessive CEO pay, and everytime we try to fix it, we make things worse. Seen tons of studies on this. Limit the pay and then they just give them stock options, blabla. Long story short, this sort of thing helped cause the mess we are in now. Because CEO's used to worry about the long term success of the company. Today, they worry about short term so they can cash out their stocks.

Boards are made up of CEO's of other companies.

It's a fucking scam!!!

This is the good old boys network and I don't like it. They need to be broken up.

I was formerly a CEO. Was let go due to the company being unable to come up to the performance standard to bring it public. That was what I was hired to do and, like many others, did not succeed. Had it worked I would have acquired company shares.

Given that my success was not at all assured and would have been something just short of a miracle, getting company shares seemed fair compensation to me, to the board, and had they been asked, would have been to the employees whose security and prospering would have been greatly enhanced.

While it does not suit our natural egalitarian instincts, there is clearly a cast system out there in nearly every field and within life. Even the French revolution begat such a structure. In business much of it is justified based on abilities. And as with anything, a good bit is not as well. Such is life in general.

The reason former CEOs are on boards is that they understand the larger issues of company decision making. There is no practical way to change this unless one wants either no corporate business leader governance, bureaucrat governance, or common man governance (which will almost certainly lead to failure).

At the heart of the populist instinct on executive compensation is to feel that those in the business as they are should not be paid so much. Perhaps that is true. But then what should that be, how should it be decided, how should it be enforced and how should it vary by industry, company size, business model and circumstances. At the end of the day, public pressure is the only practical answer.

 

[Brn2bfree]

You're a freakin' broken record.

Did you create this thread? Unions are anti American?

And you have the balls to call me a broken record? You guys have been bashing unions for 30 years.

You're also an idiot as well as a broken record.
Things have changed within the 30 years.
You liberal idiots say you support the poor and hate places like Wal Mart who the poor benefit from the low prices.
You're an idiot to not see how good Wal Mart is doing without a union. Look at how GM and Chrysler are doing with unions.
Why can't you understand the truth...the reality of things?
You think your book smart but lacking common sense?

 

[midcan5]

Unions are as American as Apple pie. Those who criticize unions know no history, know no labor, really know nothing. Unions gave us the highest standard of living in the world until Reagan began the destruction of worker's rights and fairness. Today you see the results as walmart's world of cheap destroys lives and cost society and neighborhoods their livelihood.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYiKdJoSsb8[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N43Cm6ra0hY[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEZ2neLTSSw[/ame]